Bellows v. Sowles
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit, with two special counts and common counts. Pleas, the general issue, special pleas in bar, and notice of special matters in defence. Trial by jury, September Term, 1880, Royce, J., presiding. Verdict for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, with two special counts and common counts. Pleas, the general issue, special pleas in bar, and notice of special matters in defence. Trial by jury, September Term, 1880, Royce, J., presiding. Verdict for the plaintiff. The declaration alleged in substance : That the plaintiff was a relative and heir-at-law of Hiram Bellows; that by the terms of the last will of said Bellows no allowance was made for the plaintiff; that the plaintiff claimed and insisted that he was left out of said will, and that no provision or allowance out of the estate was made for him through undue influence…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
■ Ross, J.
The exceptions taken on the trial, as well in regard to the defendant’s motion for a verdict, as in regard to the refusal of the court to charge as requested, relate mainly to the subject of the consideration for the defendant’s promise. This subject, and the particular phase of it involved in this case, was under consideration in Ormsbee v. Howe, 54 Vt. 182. It is there said : “ The compromise of a doubtful right is a sufficient consideration for a promise, and it does not matter on whose side the right ultimately turns out to be.” The…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ormsbee v. HoweSupreme Court of Vermont · 1881
- Hoyt v. DeweySupreme Court of Vermont · 1878
3Cited by24 opinions
- Smith v. FarraOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- Kam Chin Chun Ming v. Kam Hee HoHawaii Supreme Court · 1962
- Warner v. WarnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Connecticut River Lumber Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Vermont · 1895
- Montgomery v. GrenierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1912
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.