Ferris v. Barlow
Supreme Court of Vermont
MOTION by the defendants, that a judgment of Franklin county court against them be reversed, and a new trial granted. The action below was assumpsit, on the following special contract : “Whereas Samuel Barlow is indebted to Orange Ferris, in the sum of about four hundred and thirty dollars — Now in consideration, that said Ferris will forbear to sue the said Barlow for the aforesaid debt, for the term of five weeks, we agree to execute our joint and several notes to said…
Read the full summary
MOTION by the defendants, that a judgment of Franklin county court against them be reversed, and a new trial granted. The action below was assumpsit, on the following special contract : “Whereas Samuel Barlow is indebted to Orange Ferris, in the sum of about four hundred and thirty dollars — Now in consideration, that said Ferris will forbear to sue the said Barlow for the aforesaid debt, for the term of five weeks, we agree to execute our joint and several notes to said Ferris, for whatever sum is due to said Ferris, to be divided into four equal instal-ments; one payable 1st May, 1825, one,…
1Opinion of the Court
After argument, the opinion of the court was delivered by
Skinner, Ch. J.
It is conceded in the case, that the contract declared upon is a valid one, that there has been a breach, and that the plaintiff is entitled to recover; but it is insisted, nominal damages only are to be given. In the assessment of damages for the non performance of a contract, the amount or value of the consideration paid is not the rule by which the jury are to make the estimate, though there may be cases in which this would be the only measure. In the case of a contract for the payment of money, the amount contracted…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Willis v. DudleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1847
- Bryant v. GaleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1832