W. R. Danforth & Co. v. Walker
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit for breach of contract in not taking a quantity of pot atoes agreeably to the contract between the plaintiffs and defendant. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, June Term, 1864, Aldis, J., presiding. A question raised on trial in respect to certain evidence was abandoned in the supreme court.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for breach of contract in not taking a quantity of pot atoes agreeably to the contract between the plaintiffs and defendant. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, June Term, 1864, Aldis, J., presiding. A question raised on trial in respect to certain evidence was abandoned in the supreme court. It appeared on trial that about the 18th day of January, 1859, the defendant ^ made a verbal contract with the plaintiffs to purchase of them five car loads of potatoes, being fifteen hundred bushels, to be delivered on the cars at Stratford depot, N. H., as soon as the defendant should…
1Opinion of the CourtPeck, J.
The exception to the decision of the court excluding certain evidence offered by the defendant, is not insisted on in argument.
The only question for this court to decide is as to the charge to the jury. The defendant requested the court to instruct the jury that the defendant was not liable for damage for any potatoes purchased by the plaintiff after the defendant’s letter to the plaintiff of *242January 27tli, directing the plaintiffs to purchase no more. The court refused this, and instructed the jury that the defendant was liable in damage for all the potatoes purchased, and that although…
2Cited by36 opinions
- Oklahoma Vinegar Co. v. Carter & FordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Gibbons v. BenteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Kingman & Co. v. Western Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1899
- Stanford v. McGillNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1897
- Collins v. DelaporteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.