Legal Opinion

Austin v. Chittenden

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided January 15, 1861PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Assumpsit against the defendant as endorser of a promissory-note signed by Bradley & Canfield. The defendant pleaded payment and also an extension of the time of payment by a binding-agreement between the plaintiff and the makers of the note, without the defendant’s knowledge. The cause was tried by the jury at the March Term, 1860, ■ — Kellogg, J., presiding.

Read the full summary

Assumpsit against the defendant as endorser of a promissory-note signed by Bradley & Canfield. The defendant pleaded payment and also an extension of the time of payment by a binding-agreement between the plaintiff and the makers of the note, without the defendant’s knowledge. The cause was tried by the jury at the March Term, 1860, ■ — Kellogg, J., presiding. The defendant’s testimony tended to prove that after the maturity of the note in question, the plaintiff, by her son and agent, Gustavus A. Austin, accepted from the makers of the note in discharge of it and two other notes against them…

1Opinion of the Court

Poland, Ch. J.

There is very great harmony in the books, and cases, as to the general principle governing the admissibility of the acts and declarations of our agent, as evidence against his principal. Whatever an agent says or does in the execution of his agency, is admissible; but his subsequent admissions, as to what he had so said or done are not.

The single inquiry, then, as to the admissibility of the declarations of G-. A. Austin made to Mitchell, and the written statement of the notes furnished to Canfield, is this : was he then acting as the plaintiff’s agent; and were these statements…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Austin v. DorwinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Hansen v. Oregon-Wash. R. & N. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Hupfer v. National Distilling Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Pritchett v. MitchellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1876
  4. Spinney's Administratrix v. HookerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
  5. Earle v. GroutSupreme Court of Vermont · 1873

6 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