Legal Opinion

Cheeny v. Clark

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided February 15, 1830PublishedCited by 7 opinions

This was a writ o f error to reverse a judgement rendered by the county court, in an action on book account, in which the Pontiffs in error were defendants, and the defendant in error was plaintiff- The auditor’s report, on which the judgement was tendered, and to which exceptions were taken in the court below, stated,that the services charged in the plaintiff’s account were performed by him on the congregational meeting house in Rutland ; that the defendants were a…

Read the full summary

This was a writ o f error to reverse a judgement rendered by the county court, in an action on book account, in which the Pontiffs in error were defendants, and the defendant in error was plaintiff- The auditor’s report, on which the judgement was tendered, and to which exceptions were taken in the court below, stated,that the services charged in the plaintiff’s account were performed by him on the congregational meeting house in Rutland ; that the defendants were a committee appointed to superintend the building of said house agreeably to certain articles of agreement subscribed by the…

1Opinion of the Court

Per. Curiam.

The subscribers to the articles of agreement, not being constituted a society under the statute with corporate *435powers^, but being a mere voluntary association of individuals, the question is, whether the defendants, who acted as their committee in superintending the building of the meeting-house, were personally answerable for the services performed by the plaintiff upon it. It does not appear that the defendants made any express promise, or pledged their individual credit and responsibility, so as thereby to impose a personal obligation upon themselves •; nor does it appear that…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. McClees v. Grand International Brotherhood of Locomotive EngineersOhio Court of Appeals · 1938
  2. Missouri Bottlers' Ass'n v. FennertyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
  3. Huth v. Humboldt Stamm, No. 153Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1891
  4. Coyle v. Morrisdale Coal Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1922
  5. Kendall v. HathawaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1894

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API