Warren v. Caryl
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action in assumpsit. Plea, the general issue and declaration in offset. The case was referred, and heard upon the referee’s report at the September Term, 1888, Royce, Ch. J., presiding.
Read the full summary
This was an action in assumpsit. Plea, the general issue and declaration in offset. The case was referred, and heard upon the referee’s report at the September Term, 1888, Royce, Ch. J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff on his declaration for $36.85. Eor the defendánt on his declaration in offset for $12.72, being judgment for the plaintiff for a balance of $21.13. Exceptions by the defendant. . Item No. 12 in the plaintiff’s specifications was: “ To one half of hay used and not returned, $31.” With reference to this item the referee found as follows: “ At the time the defendant took…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Ross, J.
The plaintiff contends that there was error in the-judgment of the County Court in allowing item 12 of the plaintiff’s specifications. This item is for the balance of hay which the plaintiff furnished more than his share towards keeping the-stock in the spring of 1881. The parties, March 16, 1881,, entered into a contract, under seal, by which the defendant waste carry on the plaintiff’s farm upon shares for two years from-April 1 following. The contract is specific in reference to the-stock put upon the farm, 'its increase and growth, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Fulton v. WileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1860
- La Point v. ScottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Joy v. WalkerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1857
3Cited by4 opinions
- Goslant v. Town of CalaisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1916
- Vaillancourt v. GoverSupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
- Holmes v. LarawaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- McBride v. McNallSupreme Court of Vermont · 1918