Legal Opinion
Barre Trust Co. v. Ladd Et Ux.
Supreme Court of Vermont
Decided May 5, 1931PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The plaintiff seeks to recover on a demand promissory note for five thousand dollars, executed by the defendants, who are husband and wife, dated May 11, 1929, payable, to the order of George B. Littlefield, and indorsed by him to the plaintiff. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict for the defendants. The plaintiff excepted.
The defendants filed three pleas. The first plea alleges that the note was obtained from them without consideration.
The substance of the third plea is that the defendants were induced to execute and deliver the note in question by the false and fraudulent…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Canajoharie National Bank v. DiefendorfNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- McNight v. ParsonsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Woodhouse v. Woodhouse Et Ux.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1925
- Arnd v. AylesworthSupreme Court of Iowa · 1909
- Crompton v. BeedleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Shea v. PiletteSupreme Court of Vermont · 1937
- Gramatan National Bank and Trust Co. v. PierceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1960
- Butler, Admr. v. FavreauSupreme Court of Vermont · 1933
- Dow v. A. C. Cheney Piano Action Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1932
- Commercial Finance Corp. v. GaleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.