Allen v. Thrall
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of book account, brought to the county court, in which judgment to account was rendered, and an auditor appointed, who reported, that the plaintiff and Warren Drinwater had been, for some time previous to the 15th day of Dec. 1827, partners in business, as tanners, under the firm of Allen & Drinwater ; that on the day and year last. aforesaid they dissolved said partnership, and the said Drinwater assigned all his interest, in the partnership effects,…
Read the full summary
This was an action of book account, brought to the county court, in which judgment to account was rendered, and an auditor appointed, who reported, that the plaintiff and Warren Drinwater had been, for some time previous to the 15th day of Dec. 1827, partners in business, as tanners, under the firm of Allen & Drinwater ; that on the day and year last. aforesaid they dissolved said partnership, and the said Drinwater assigned all his interest, in the partnership effects, including debts due to the firm, to the plaintiff, the plaintiff covenanting to pay all the partnership debts out of the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Redfield, J.
The county court decided against the plaintiff, in regard to the charge for a wagon, to which-deci*259sion the plaintiff -took no exceptions, and on that account he cannot here insist that that decision was not well founded. If some points in a case are decided against one party, and others against the other, so that the party recovers but a portion of his claim, he must except to those decisions which are against him, or he cannot revise them in the supreme court, although the other party should remove the case into that court, on exceptions…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Barker v. EstySupreme Court of Vermont · 1847
- Gerrish v. New Market Man. Co.Superior Court of New Hampshire · 1854
- Grover v. John Hancock Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1956