Smith v. Estate of Rogers
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an appeal from the decision of commissioners upon the estate of Deliverance Rogers, The case was referred, and the referee reported-the following facts : On the 16th of November, 1846, one Randall was, and had for several years previously been, in the occupancy of a farm in Derby, belonging to the testator, Rogers, upon shares.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from the decision of commissioners upon the estate of Deliverance Rogers, The case was referred, and the referee reported-the following facts : On the 16th of November, 1846, one Randall was, and had for several years previously been, in the occupancy of a farm in Derby, belonging to the testator, Rogers, upon shares. Randall had upon the farm at that time, stock and property to the value of about fourteen hundred dollars, in which Rogers had some interest, to the amount of one-half or more. At this time Randall was indebted, among other creditors, ■ to the plaintiff Smith,…
1Opinion of the Court
Poland, Ch. J.
The facts reported by the referee, are exceedingly vague and uncertain, but this is probably to be *143accounted for by the antiquity of the transaction, and the decease of Rogers, one of the parties to it, rather than from any fault of the referee.
The referee distinctly finds and reports that Rogers promised to pay the plaintiff’s debt against Randall.
The counsel for the defendant claims, thaf this promise can not ■ be legally enforced for two reasons.
1st. Because not founded upon any sufficient consideration.
2nd. That it was a promise to pay the debt of another, and therefore…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cross v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
- Wait v. of WaitSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Lampson v. Estate of HobartSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bailey v. BaileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
- Steubenville, East Liverpool & Beaver Valley Traction Co. v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis RailroadWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1928