McDonald v. Eggleston
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action of covenant. Plea, non esi factum, and trial by jury. Oh trial the plaintiffs introduced the following deed: “ Articles “of agreement made this 16th day of May, A. D. 1846, by and “ between John McDonald and Thomas Mills of the one part, and “ Eggleston, Barker & Co. of the second part: Witnesseth, That “ for and in consideration of the payments and covenants herein» “ after mentioned to be made and performed by said parties of the “ second part, the said parties of…
Read the full summary
Action of covenant. Plea, non esi factum, and trial by jury. Oh trial the plaintiffs introduced the following deed: “ Articles “of agreement made this 16th day of May, A. D. 1846, by and “ between John McDonald and Thomas Mills of the one part, and “ Eggleston, Barker & Co. of the second part: Witnesseth, That “ for and in consideration of the payments and covenants herein» “ after mentioned to be made and performed by said parties of the “ second part, the said parties of the first part do hereby prom- “ ise and agree to execute, construct and finish in every respect, in “ the most…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Isham, J.
This action is in covenant. The questions in the case arise under the plea of non est faction, which puts in issue the execution of the instrument on which- the action is brought. The agreement Was signed and sealed, in the name of Eggleston, Barker & Co., by B. Barker, one of the firm. It is insisted that he had no authority as a partner to execute the instrument in that manner; that it is not binding on those partners, who were absent at the time, and who had not previous^ assented to its execution; and that no testimony was introduced,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Lucas v. Bank of DarienSupreme Court of Alabama · 1830
- MbBride v. HaganNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Wood's Administrator v. Wood's DeviseesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1859
- Wells & Spring v. EvansNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Pike v. BaconSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1842
3Cited by5 opinions
- Threadgill v. ButlerTexas Supreme Court · 1884
- Mutual Benefit Life Insurance v. BrownNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1878
- Smyth v. LynchColorado Court of Appeals · 1896
- McIntyre v. ParkMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1858
- Smyth v. LynchColorado Court of Appeals · 1896