Ormsbee v. Howe
Supreme Court of Vermont
Heard by the court, September Term, 1880, Rutland County, Ross, J., presiding. Action, assumpsit on a note, with the common counts added ; plea and replication. Both cases were substantially alike.
Read the full summary
Heard by the court, September Term, 1880, Rutland County, Ross, J., presiding. Action, assumpsit on a note, with the common counts added ; plea and replication. Both cases were substantially alike. The court rendered judgment for the plaintiff on the following facts : One Healey was the real owner of the note. $95 Sharon, Yt., Jan. 29th, 1877. On the first day of August next, for value received, I promise to pay O. Preston or bearer ninety-five dollars with use, payable at the Royalton Nat. Bank of Royalton, Yt. P. O. Sharon, Yt. M. G. Howe. The execution and delivery of the note were…
1Opinion of the Court
*186The opinion of the court was delivered by
Veazey J.
The plaintiff, an attorney, brought these suits in his own name in behalf of one Healey, who purchased the notes before due of one Preston, the payee. Preston by fraud obtained orders of the defendants respectively for a lot of wire clothes line, and after filling the orders according to their terms, demanded through an agent payment of the defendants. They at first ¿refused on account of the fraud, not knowing until the demand that they had signed such orders, and not in fact having signed them understandingly, and having been induced to sign…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Kittredge v. GrannisNew York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Bellows v. SowlesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1883
- Howard v. HowardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1960
- Paika v. PerryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
- Kirby v. BerguinSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1902
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.