Whitcomb v. Robbins
Supreme Court of Vermont
Petition to the Supreme Court for the County of Chittenden at the May Term, 1896, for awrit of prohibition against Thomas C. Robbins as Judge of the Court of Insolvency for the District of Rutland, George E. Lawrence, attorney for the Walter A. Wood Mowing and Reaping Machine Co., and John D. Miller as assignee in insolvency of the same company. The defendants answered, evidence was taken and a stipulation filed, upon which the case was heard.
Read the full summary
Petition to the Supreme Court for the County of Chittenden at the May Term, 1896, for awrit of prohibition against Thomas C. Robbins as Judge of the Court of Insolvency for the District of Rutland, George E. Lawrence, attorney for the Walter A. Wood Mowing and Reaping Machine Co., and John D. Miller as assignee in insolvency of the same company. The defendants answered, evidence was taken and a stipulation filed, upon which the case was heard. The material facts appear in the opinion. The court of insolvency is purely statutory and its jurisdiction limited. It has no powers not conferred…
1Opinion of the CourtTyler, J.
It appears by the agreed statement of facts that the Wood Mowing and Reaping Machine Company was a corporation created and existing under the laws of the state of New York, and having its manufactory and home office at Hoosic Falls in that state where its manufacturing was solely done. It had agents in each county in this State to whom it sent its machines for sale and whose sole duty was to sell, collect pay for and remit the amount to the company. Its product was disposed of in the same manner in nearly all the other states. It never had agents in this State other than those above…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- McConnell v. KelleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
3Cited by1 opinion
- Thorp v. PorterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1898