Abbott v. Camp
Supreme Court of Vermont
Book. Account. The suit was commenced in the county of Washington. Judgment to account was rendered, and an auditor was appointed, who reported the facts substantially as follows. The plaintiff’s account was in part for granite, quarried by him, for which he charged $1,75 per cubic yard, and for trimming granite, for which he charged twenty cents per foot.
Read the full summary
Book. Account. The suit was commenced in the county of Washington. Judgment to account was rendered, and an auditor was appointed, who reported the facts substantially as follows. The plaintiff’s account was in part for granite, quarried by him, for which he charged $1,75 per cubic yard, and for trimming granite, for which he charged twenty cents per foot. In the autumn of 1847 E. P. Jewett & Co. (a firm consisting of E. P. Jewett, M. Cottrill and L. S. Humphrey) had contracted to construct a section of the Vt. Central Rail Road, including three bridges across the Winooski and Dog rivers; and…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
It seems to us, the auditor has found substantially, that the articles disallowed in the plaintiff’s account, were furnished upon the credit of Jewett & Co., and that no contract, either express or implied, existed in regard to them between these parties. If it were possible to imply a contract from the facts found, that could only be done by the county court. It is never the province of a court of errors to deduce inferences of fact from a case agreed, a special verdict, or a report of referees, or auditors. From the judgment rendered by the county court, we must conclude, they…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Denison v. HibbardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1833
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hitchcock v. KennisonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1921
- Roberts v. W. H. Hughes Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1912