Legal Opinion

Van Dyke v. Wilder & Co.

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 15, 1894PublishedCited by 8 opinions

General assumpsit. Plea, the general issue. Heard upon the report of a referee at the December term, Caledonia county, 1893, Rowell, J., presiding. Judgment on the report for the plaintiff. The defendants except. The plaintiff sought to recover the balance due for logs furnished by him to the defendants.

Read the full summary

General assumpsit. Plea, the general issue. Heard upon the report of a referee at the December term, Caledonia county, 1893, Rowell, J., presiding. Judgment on the report for the plaintiff. The defendants except. The plaintiff sought to recover the balance due for logs furnished by him to the defendants. Negotiations for the sale of these logs were first entered into between the plaintiff and Wilder, one of the defendants; but before any contract was concluded Wilder referred the matter to one Hall as his agent, and the trade was completed between the plaintiff and Hall. The defendants…

1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.

I. The referee reports that the defendants conceded that “whatever trade was made’’with the plaintiff in the purchase of the logs was made by Hall as their agent. Therefore no question in respect to agency is before this court.

On trial the. defendants claimed that by the terms of the trade the logs were to be measured by the “Blodgett rule,” and offered to show by defendant Wilder ‘ ‘ that the authority given to Hall was to purchase only by the Blodgett survey or rule,” which evidence was excluded. The referee has found that the logs were to be surveyed by the Maine rule, full measure, and…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Brigham v. DanaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
  2. Gassett v. Town of AndoverSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
  3. Miller v. HoldenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1846
  4. Towslee v. HealeySupreme Court of Vermont · 1867
  5. Boston Rubber Co. v. Peerless Wringer Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1886

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Lapp-Gifford Co. v. Muscoy Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Parker v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1911
  3. Drown's Guardian v. Chesley's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
  4. Hillestad v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904
  5. Siwooganock Guaranty Savings Bank v. CushmanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1937

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API