Gleason v. Allen
Supreme Court of Vermont
Contract. Book Account. Both actions were referred to the same auditor, who reported, in each case, substantially the same facts, which were as follows: On the 28th day of February, 1848, the plaintiff, Henry C. Gleason and one "William B. Brown, then in life, but since deceased, were partners in the business of conducting a country retail store, at Cuttingsville, under the name of Brown & Gleason, and had been from before the 29th of October, 1846; and the same Brown and…
Read the full summary
Contract. Book Account. Both actions were referred to the same auditor, who reported, in each case, substantially the same facts, which were as follows: On the 28th day of February, 1848, the plaintiff, Henry C. Gleason and one "William B. Brown, then in life, but since deceased, were partners in the business of conducting a country retail store, at Cuttingsville, under the name of Brown & Gleason, and had been from before the 29th of October, 1846; and the same Brown and Gleason, together with one John Reed and Loring C. Frost, were, on said 28th of February, 1848, co-partners in the…
1Opinion of the Court
In the suit against Allen & Stafford the following opinion was delivered by
Bennett, J.
The material facts, in the report of the auditor are, that the plaintiff and one Brown, now deceased, in February, 1848, were partners in trade, and had been for some time before; and they and one Reed & Frost on the 28th day of February, 1848, became partners in a railroad contract on the Rutland & Burlington railroad. Huntoon & Dow were also partners for the construction of another section of the same railroad; and on the same 28th day of February, 1848, these two companies who had the railroad contracts…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Strong v. Preserved FishSupreme Court of Vermont · 1841
3Cited by2 opinions
- Campbell Coal Co. v. PanoCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
- Tyler v. ScottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1873