Dunning v. Chamberlin
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action on book, commenced to the county court by writ dated August 27th, 1832, and declaring against defendants as partners under the firm of Curtis & Chamberlin. It was referred to auditors, who reported as follows: The account exhibited by plaintiff, was, Messrs. Curtis & Chamberlin, to Amos Dunning Dr. 1817..
Read the full summary
This was an action on book, commenced to the county court by writ dated August 27th, 1832, and declaring against defendants as partners under the firm of Curtis & Chamberlin. It was referred to auditors, who reported as follows: The account exhibited by plaintiff, was, Messrs. Curtis & Chamberlin, to Amos Dunning Dr. 1817.. To services as clerk and hand on board your fishing vessel, in the Bay Chaliur, and west of Gaspee, from May 8, to Dec. 1, at $20 per month, 144,66 1818. To do. from May 11, to Dec. 22, 151,6Q 1819. To do. from May 11, to Nóv. 20, 1820, 366,85 $663,11 It was proved by the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Count was pronounced by
Mattocks, J.
— There is nothing in the first objection. It is the lex loci that governs the contract,' but the lex fori the remedy.. 2. It is immaterial whether the plaintiff should have been allowed to testify to the partnership, as the case shows that it was proved by another witness, that Chamberlin, the defendant, admitted the partnership.
3. Whether an unsatisfied foreign judgment against Curtis, one of the firm, merges or bars the present claims, is not raised by the facts. The judgment was proved only by the plaintiff: he objecting to testify,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ruggles v. KeelerNew York Supreme Court · 1808
- Troup v. Executors of SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Mazozon v. FootSupreme Court of Vermont · 1826
3Cited by4 opinions
- Jamieson v. PottsOregon Supreme Court · 1909
- Graves v. WeeksSupreme Court of Vermont · 1847
- Paine v. DrewSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860
- Alaska Credit Bureau v. FennerDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1948