Hunt v. Gookin
Supreme Court of Vermont
The bill in this case set forth, that the orator had labored for the intestate, Richard Gookin, from 1804 to 1807, in tending .a carding machine — that in April, 1807, he entered into partnership with the said Richard in carrying on a carding machine at Bath in New Hampshire, and for other business, which continued to the death of Mr. Gookin in 1826 — 'and that a large balance was due to the orator; that after Mr. Gookin’s death a commissioner was appointed on the estate in…
Read the full summary
The bill in this case set forth, that the orator had labored for the intestate, Richard Gookin, from 1804 to 1807, in tending .a carding machine — that in April, 1807, he entered into partnership with the said Richard in carrying on a carding machine at Bath in New Hampshire, and for other business, which continued to the death of Mr. Gookin in 1826 — 'and that a large balance was due to the orator; that after Mr. Gookin’s death a commissioner was appointed on the estate in New Hampshire, to receive and examine the claims against his estate — that he attended before the commissioners for the…
1Opinion of the Court
*475The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, Chancellor.
— This cause comes before us on exceptions to the answer of the defendant. The master ruled that the defendant should make further answer. Exceptions ’ were taken to the decision of the master, and a hearing has now been had on these exceptions. The question is, whether the defendant shall render an account' in his answer of the dealings and partnership transactions between Gookin and Hunt; and this presents the point, whether a defendant may, in his answer to a bill, set forth certain facts as a bar to a further answer, and…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Guccione v. ScottNew York Supreme Court · 1897