Grout Bros. v. Moulton
Supreme Court of Vermont
General Assumpsit for the price of an automobile sold and delivered. Pleas, the general issue, declaration in offset, consisting of the common money counts, a count to recover commissions on certain sales of automobiles made by plaintiffs in defendant’s territory, a count to recover damages for the alleged failure of plaintiffs to equip said automobile with a fusible plug and steam air pump, and for failure to properly demonstrate same.
Read the full summary
General Assumpsit for the price of an automobile sold and delivered. Pleas, the general issue, declaration in offset, consisting of the common money counts, a count to recover commissions on certain sales of automobiles made by plaintiffs in defendant’s territory, a count to recover damages for the alleged failure of plaintiffs to equip said automobile with a fusible plug and steam air pump, and for failure to properly demonstrate same. Replications, similiter, and general issue to the declaration in offset. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1905, Orleans County, Munson, J., presiding.…
1Opinion of the CourtRowell, C. J.
Assumpsit for the price of an automobile sold and delivered as part of a written contract of agency between the parties for the sale of the plaintiff’s automobiles by the defendant in the northeastern counties of this State.
The cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witness, Karl Grout, as to the contents of the written contract of agency between them and St. Jock & Blodgett, was harmless, as it elicited nothing but the inability of the witness to remember anything about its contents.
*135The plaintiff’s letter of April 8, 1903, if immaterial, appears not to be such as to prejudice them on the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. MeaderSupreme Court of Vermont · 1881
- Hart v. HammettSupreme Court of Vermont · 1846
- Hobart v. YoungSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- McKeough's Est. v. McKeoughSupreme Court of Vermont · 1896
- New England Granite Works v. BaileySupreme Court of Vermont · 1896
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Smith v. MartinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1919
- Jenness v. SimpsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1911
- McBriety v. PhillipsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1942
- Douglass & Varnum v. Village of MorrisvilleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1915
- Cilley v. BaconSupreme Court of Vermont · 1915