Starace v. Rossi
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit. Heard upon an agreed statement of facts at the September Term, 1896, Washington County, Tafl,]., presiding.
1Opinion of the CourtRoweee, J.
The wine for the price of which recovery is sought, was Italian wine, not made in this State, and commonly known as “sour wine.” The like cannot be bought at the town agencies in this State, but only of Italian dealers, and it is used exclusively by Italians for culinary and drinking purposes; and the wine in question was bought by the defendant for those purposes, and not for sale, gift, nor distribution contrary to law, and was not thus disposed of. The order for it was taken at Barre by a broker who was plaintiff’s agent in the transaction, and was sent to, and accepted by, the plaintiff…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In Re RahrerSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Snider v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- State v. MungerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
- State v. BarronSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
- Backman v. WrightSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hart v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1905
- State v. BarrSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910
- Beverwick Brewing Co. v. OliverSupreme Court of Vermont · 1897
- Pabst Brewing Co. v. SmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Bacon v. F. W. Hunt & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1900
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.