Fullerton v. Seymour

5 Vt. 249
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided January 15, 1833·Published

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Baylies, J.

The defendants on trial before the County Court contended, that there was a variance between the averment in the declaration,' and the indorsement on the note : the averment is, “ that Grant and Seaver indorsed said note, their own proper hand writing being to such in-dorsement subscribed.” Whereas the evidence is, that the indorsement is wholly in the hand writing of Grant. As [250] there is no averment in the declaration, that Grant & Seaver were partners, or were acting under a nrm or that name, we are inclined to believe, that the indorsement mac^e by Grant alone, does not prove the averment, “ that Grant & Seaver indorsed said note, their own proper hand writing being to svch indorsement subscribed.” Levy vs. Wilson, 5 Esp. N. P. R. 180; Pease et al vs. Morgan, 7 J. R. 468.

Waller, for plaintiff. Q. Seymour, for defendants.

Therefore, it is considered, that the County Court erred in deciding there was no variance, and their judgement must be set aside, and

A new trial granted.

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

Fullerton v. Seymour, 5 Vt. 249 (Vt. 1833).

5 Vt. 249 (Fullerton v. Seymour) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.