Wiilliams v. Hicks
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action on note of $160, dated April 10th, 1820, executed by the defendants to one Mixer, and by him indorsed in blank, and delivered to a Mr. Hall of Keene, JY. H. and was sued in the name of the plaintiff for said Hall. Plea, general issue.
Read the full summary
This was an action on note of $160, dated April 10th, 1820, executed by the defendants to one Mixer, and by him indorsed in blank, and delivered to a Mr. Hall of Keene, JY. H. and was sued in the name of the plaintiff for said Hall. Plea, general issue. It appeared, and was undisputed, that this was one of five notes of the same sum and date, executed by the defendants for the purchase from said Mixer of his patent right of making, using and vending saddles of a kind described in said patent, called' Mixer’s patent spring saddles ; which notes were payable at different periods; and this was…
1Opinion of the Court
*39The opinion of the court was pronounced by
Paddock, J.
The defence against a recovery in this case appears to be, first, that there was no consideration for the giving of the note in question,and the four others; the patent right,for the purchase of which they were given in payment, being useless and of no value,at the time of the purchase : and secondly,Hast Mixer, the vendor, to whom the notes were executed, made use of false and deceitful representations to the defendants at the time to induce them to purchase. .
The plea in this case being the general issue, almost every matter may be given…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Fleming v. HoltWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877
- Childs v. MerrillSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
- Clough v. PatrickSupreme Court of Vermont · 1865
- Thrall v. HortonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1872
- Stone v. PeakeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.