Pierce v. Bradford
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. Heard upon the report of a referee and exceptions thereto at the March term, 1891, Washington county, Munson, J., presiding. Exceptions overruled and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum found by the referee. The defendant excepts. The case appears in the opinion. The wife was a competent witness. R. L. s. 1005; No. 45 Acts 1886; Easterbroohs v. Prentiss, 34 Yt. 459;- Oreott v. Gooh, 37 Yt. 517; Lunay v. Vantyne, 40 Yt. 501. The wife was not competent.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit. Heard upon the report of a referee and exceptions thereto at the March term, 1891, Washington county, Munson, J., presiding. Exceptions overruled and judgment for the plaintiff in the sum found by the referee. The defendant excepts. The case appears in the opinion. The wife was a competent witness. R. L. s. 1005; No. 45 Acts 1886; Easterbroohs v. Prentiss, 34 Yt. 459;- Oreott v. Gooh, 37 Yt. 517; Lunay v. Vantyne, 40 Yt. 501. The wife was not competent. This was not a matter of business transacted by her as the agent of her husband. Carpenter v. Moore, 43 Yt. 392; Sargeant v.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
THOMPSON, J.
The principal contention between the parties was whether the defendant had paid the plaintiff $25, to *220apply on bis claim for work performed for the defendant. At some time near the date of the alleged payment, the plaintiff told defendant’s wife that he wanted some money, which she communicated to the defendant. The defendant’s evidence tended to show that on the morning of Sept. 16, 1889, when he got up, he gave his wife $25, and directed her to give it to the plaintiff, and then went to the barn to do his chores; and that the plaintiff…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lunay v. VantyneSupreme Court of Vermont · 1868
- Martin v. HurlburtSupreme Court of Vermont · 1888
3Cited by2 opinions
- Pingree v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1896
- Farrar v. BellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1901