Bailey v. Blanchard
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On exceptions and motion eor a new trial. Assumpsit upon an account annexed for cutting and hauling logs, the number and measurements of which were the matters in dispute ; the defendant conceding an indebtedness and offering to be defaulted for $77o, and the plaintiff claiming $1,171.61. The work was commenced under a written contract, dated Nov. 23,1870, which was offered in evidence by the defendant, objected to by the plaintiff on the ground of an alleged rescission of…
Read the full summary
On exceptions and motion eor a new trial. Assumpsit upon an account annexed for cutting and hauling logs, the number and measurements of which were the matters in dispute ; the defendant conceding an indebtedness and offering to be defaulted for $77o, and the plaintiff claiming $1,171.61. The work was commenced under a written contract, dated Nov. 23,1870, which was offered in evidence by the defendant, objected to by the plaintiff on the ground of an alleged rescission of it, hut admitted by the court. The defendant conceded that it had been changed as to price and mode of payment, but…
1Opinion of the CourtBarrows, J.
The plaintiff’s objection to the admission of the written contract between himself and the defendant for the cutting and hauling of the logs, for which he was claiming to recover on a general indebitatus assumpsit is untenable. The exceptions show that while he claimed it was rescinded, the defendant claimed that it was in force, except so far as it had been modified by a subsequent parol agreement, increasing the price and changing the mode of payment. Whichever party was right on the disputed point, the question was one which it became necessary for the jury to pass upon, and the contract…
2Cited by2 opinions
- M. De Matteo Construction Co. v. Maine Turnpike AuthorityDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1960
- Connecticut Valley Lumber Co. v. StoneCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1914