Jones v. Sennott
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. Plea, general issue, with notice of discharge in bankruptcy. Replication, new promise after the discharge was obtained. Trial by Jury, September Term, 1885, Royce, Ch. J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Plea, general issue, with notice of discharge in bankruptcy. Replication, new promise after the discharge was obtained. Trial by Jury, September Term, 1885, Royce, Ch. J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the defendant. cited to prove error in the charge of the court, Kimball v. Baxter, 27 Vt. 628; Brewin v. Farrell, 39 Vt. 206; Hill v. Kendall, 25 Vt. 528; Allen & Co. v. Ferguson, 18 Wall. 1. cited to prove that the promise was not sufficient, MeDougall v. Page, 55 Vt. 190; Allen & Co. v. Ferguson, 18 Wall. 1; Kimball v. Baxter, 27 Vt. 628; Ang. Lim. 238; that there was no…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Veazey, J.
The action is assumpsit upon a promissory note. The defence was a discharge in bankruptcy; to which the plaintiff replied a new promise. The testimony of the plaintiff tended to show a new promise, after the discharge in bankruptcy, to the plaintiff’s son Henry, acting in her behalf. The note in suit was a renewal of a former .note, but given before the bankruptcy proceedings were instituted. When the son had the talks with the defendant in which, as the son testified, the new promise was made, he had with him the old note, and did' not know…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Taylor v. St. ClairSupreme Court of Vermont · 1907
- State v. HathornSupreme Court of Vermont · 1927