Goodenough v. Huff
Supreme Court of Vermont
This case was heard at the September Term, 1880, Ross, J., presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, in two special and the general counts. Pleas, the general issue, and Statute of Limitations. Replication, similitur to the general issue, and to the plea of the Statute of Limitations, a general traverse that the cause of action did accrue within six years, &c. The declaration, pleas and motions were part of the exceptions.
Read the full summary
This case was heard at the September Term, 1880, Ross, J., presiding. This was an action of assumpsit, in two special and the general counts. Pleas, the general issue, and Statute of Limitations. Replication, similitur to the general issue, and to the plea of the Statute of Limitations, a general traverse that the cause of action did accrue within six years, &c. The declaration, pleas and motions were part of the exceptions. The plaintiff introduced in evidence a promissory note dated March 18,1869, signed by Benjamin P. Huff, John Huff and the defendant. It appeared that the defendant and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, J.
The plea of the general issue put in issue the fact, when the- defendant made the promise alleged in the second special count, and the consideration for making it. The court only submitted to the jury to find when he made the promise by executing the note that was put in evidence, and the amount due upon it.
It was incumbent on the plaintiff to show a legal consideration to support the promise, — and if he introduced any evidence tending to show such a consideration for the promise as is alleged in the declaration, it was his right to have it…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hudson v. MoonUtah Supreme Court · 1913
- Farrant v. BatesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1887