Fuller v. Miller

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Fuller v. Miller

57 Me. 168

DecidedJuly 1, 1869

StatusPublished

This text of 57 Me. 168 (Fuller v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Fuller v. Miller, 57 Me. 168 (Me. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Appleton, C. J.

This is an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered the defendants. To maintain it the plaintiffs must show a joint promise.

The presiding justice found that the goods were sold and delivered upon the credit of John S. Miller as original promisor. He does not find a joint promise nor facts from which a joint promise could be inferred. Indeed, the finding that the goods were delivered upon the credit of John S. Miller as original promisor, impliedly negatives liability on the part of any one else. Under the facts as found, John S. Miller alone is liable. Dxeeptions sustained.

Cutting, Kent, Walton, and Dickerson, JJ., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appleton, C. J.

This is an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered the defendants. To maintain it the plaintiffs must show a joint promise.

The presiding justice found that the goods were sold and delivered upon the credit of John S. Miller as original promisor. He does not find a joint promise nor facts from which a joint promise could be inferred. Indeed, the finding that the goods were delivered upon the credit of John S. Miller as original promisor, impliedly negatives liability on the part of any one else. Under the facts as found, John S. Miller alone is liable. Dxeeptions sustained.

Cutting, Kent, Walton, and Dickerson, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 Me. 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fuller-v-miller-me-1869.