Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1894-03-30
wINDHAM COUNTY COURT.

u. q. COrser Gets judgement for $500
Against George Hidden and =. II. ,Sher-
man One for sI20I.I0 Against A. r..
Waite---Other Cases.
asa f. Cidrh by u. n. Simonds, ad-
miHiStrdtOr, rS. d. Gilbert Derter.-Ac-
ton on a note for $500 dated September.
1872 The defendant plead the statute of
limitations and a discharge in United
States bankruptcy. The plaintiff replied
new promise since said discharge, on
which issue was joined. The execution of
the note was conceded. 1t appeared that
the money was loaned to invest i'm town
lots in Braintree, Mass, the plaintiff at
that time living in Peru, this state, and
the defendant in Cambridge, Mass. The
note was secured by mortgage on said town
lots and other stocks once held by the de-
PENDANT. The enterprise of LAYING ont
and selling town lots did not prove profita-
BILE, and the result was the defendant went
into bankruptcy in 1877, and was discharg-
ed from all his debts and liabilities i'm 1878.
The plaintiff introduced several of defend
ants letters written since his discharge,
which he contenied contained a new
promise to pay the note. The defendant
insisted that said promises were simply to
take the land and other securities off the
PLAINTIFFS hands whenever he, the defend
ant, should become financially able to do
SO; "'--- E@s~EEi !
The court pro tormd rendered iudg-
ment for the plaintiff, to which the defend
ant excepted, and the case was passed to
the supreme court. Waterman, Martin tS
Hit for plaintiff; Haskins IL Stoddard for
defendant.
b. &. COrSer rs Gcorge HiddeH.-Ac-
ton to recover a share of profits made in
the overall manufacturing company of
Hooker, Hidden e Co., for the years 1891
and 1892.
The plaintiffs evidence tended to show
that in January, 1891, he contracted with
the aforesaid firm to work for them in
1891 for $1,000 salary and in 1892 for
$1,000: that he had further contract with
defendant to pay him as additional com
pensation one-fourth of all the profits Of
the concern; that for the year 1891 the
company made about $1,000 profit, and for
the year 1892 some $4,000 profit
The evidence of defendant tended to
show that the company realized no profits
either year.
The court gave judgment for plaintiff
for 500. Waterman, Martin d Hit for
'hC pi"lhIlh IldShlnS ~ SIOuuafQ tOr the
defendant.
$. II. Sherman rs. Aitred f. Waite.-
Action to recover the amount of three
notes, viz: one for $1,000, one for S125O.
and the other for $1146.OS.
The plaintiffs evidence tended to show
that none of the notes had been paid and
were still due him with interest.
The evidence of the defendant tended to
show that all the aforesaid notes were
made for the benefit of F. NJ. Waite: that
the said +. NJ. Waite secured Sherman on
the $1,000 note By mortgage, and that out
of said property he had realized enough to
pay that note; and that as to the other two
notes defendant stood in the relation of a
co-surety with the plaintiff.
The court found in favor of the defend
ants contention, and rendered Judgment
for plaintiff to recover S1204. 40. Fits,
Waterman, Martin II Hit for plaintiff;
Haskins Il Stoddard and Challis for de-
PENDANT
In the chancery case of katherine
MdrShdH rs. W. 4. BrdckeH adminixtrd
tor, AMI +. Il. BdrropS. guardian, heard
on report of a special master, the chancel-
lor decreed all the property to the oratrix,
with the exception of certain shares of
stock in the Peoples national bank and
Bratteboro Overall company.
In case of hudson Withheld, erecutor.
rs Geo. VI. Brooks, heard on report of
special master, a decree was entered dis
missing the bill. In the same VS.. Dwight
johnson and wife, also heard on report of
special master, decree was entered for the
orator to recover the sum of S179.5S.