Drew v. Edmunds
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. Plea, non-assumpsit, and two pleas in off-set. Heard on a referee’s report, December Term, 1887, Tyler, J. , presiding.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Plea, non-assumpsit, and two pleas in off-set. Heard on a referee’s report, December Term, 1887, Tyler, J. , presiding. Judgment pro forma and without hearing as follows : The exceptions are overruled; the plaintiff has judgment against the defendants for the item of $84.41 and interest from Feb. 10, 1881 to December 6, 1887, making $120 ; and the defendants on their plea in off-set have judgment against the plaintiff for $212.34 as of the same date ; — and judgment entered for the defendant to recover of the plaintiff the balance between said sums, being $92.34. The referee found…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Veazey, J.
When the plaintiffs got word that there was difficulty with the governor they made a proposition to furnish another with all the fittings, etc., and take back the old one, at a difference of $45. The defendants accepted the offer without objection or condition'. Whatever might have been the right of the defendants independent of this arrangement, we hold that having gone into it they must stand by it. The plaintiffs had the right to undersfand, by the acceptance of their offer without notice of other claim, that the acceptance was according…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Beals v. OlmsteadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1852
3Cited by9 opinions
- Finlay v. SwirskySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Norton & Lamphere Construction Co. v. Blow & Cote, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1962
- Hobart v. YoungSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- Weinstein v. SheerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1923
- City of Camden v. South Jersey Port Com'nNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1949
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.