Granite Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Parry & Jones
This text of 78 A. 789 (Granite Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Parry & Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment was a conclusive determination that the defendants had promised the payments evidenced by the notes. The defendants’ offer was inconsistent with the terms of payment as thus determined. It was not an offer to reduce the damages by showing payments under the contract as adjudged, but an offer to show a separate writing by virtue of which the damages would be less. The notes which constituted the cause of action determined the extent of the recovery, and reduced the process of assessment to a mere computation. Sweet v. McDaniels, 39 Vt. 272; Third National Bank v. Dorset Marble Co., 58 Vt. 70; Bradley v. Chamberlain, 31 Vt. 468.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
78 A. 789, 84 Vt. 159, 1911 Vt. LEXIS 259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/granite-savings-bank-trust-co-v-parry-jones-vt-1911.