Colvin v. Carter
Ohio Supreme Court
Carter brought an action of assumpsit, in the court below, against Colvin, and declared upon the common counts, for goods sold and delivered, and upon a special contract. Colvin pleaded the general issue, with notice of offset.
Read the full summary
Carter brought an action of assumpsit, in the court below, against Colvin, and declared upon the common counts, for goods sold and delivered, and upon a special contract. Colvin pleaded the general issue, with notice of offset. On the trial, Carter produced and proved a written agreement, dated June 16, 1828, signed by Colvin, in which Colvin, in consideration of a bill of merchandise, .that day ^purchased of Car- [855 ter, amounting to one thousand seven hundred and thirty-two dollars and ninety-eight cents, agreed to pay for Carter certain notes of hand, to the amount of one thousand seven…
1Opinion of the Court
*325Opinion of the court, by
Judge Collet:
It is contended for Colvin that the opinions of the court of common pleas, contained in the bill of exceptions, are erroneous. It is the opinion of this court that the court of common pleas did not err, when it refused to instruct the jury that Carter was entitled to nominal damages only. The goods were sold by Carter to Colvin, on a limited credit, limited to the time that the notes of Carter became due, which Colvin had agreed to pay. The. clause in the agreement, that Colvin should release Carter from all liability on the notes, does not extend the time…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Holland Furnace Co. v. StevensonOhio Court of Appeals · 1930