Bates v. Starr

• Decision Date: 01 January 1830
• Parties: ROBERT B. BATES v. PETER STARR
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court

2 Vt. 536

ROBERT B. BATES v. PETER STARR

Supreme Court of Vermont, Addison

January, 1830

Error to reverse a judgment of Addison county court, rendered upon the report of auditors. The defendant in error brought his action on book account against the plaintiff in error, and the auditors reported, in substance, that the account of the plaintiff in that action consisted of services rendered as a justice of the peace, commencing in A. D. 1817, and ending in A. D. 1827; that in 1819 said services amounted to about $ 130, on account of which the defendant had then paid in professional services and otherwise about $ 37; that from the latter period until the dealings of the parties were discontinued, the defendant was also a magistrate and performed services as such for the plaintiff; during which time the services of the plaintiff for the defendant amounted to about $ 100, and those of the defendant for the plaintiff to about $ 115; that the parties being sworn, the defendant testified, that immediately preceding the commencement of mutual accounts for services, as aforesaid, in 1819, it was verbally agreed between himself and the plaintiff, that they should exchange services as magistrates, and that neither should demand payment for this services, except in like services to be rendered by the other, and that the balance then due the plaintiff was expressly included in this agreement; that they acted under the agreement so long as the services on either side were continued; that he had never waived the contract, and that he claimed the benefit of it in defence to the action--That the plaintiff did not admit the existence of the agreement, but testified to his want of recollection and disbelief, for several reasons assigned, (as that he had supposed he had a right to exact money for the balance of the account, and had never made such a contract with any other lawyer, though he had exchanged services as a magistrate with several, & c.) that such agreement was ever made. It also appeared by the report, that the parties accidentally fell into a dispute as to the fact of such an agreement, whereupon the plaintiff demanded a settlement, and soon after brought his action. The auditors further reported that they considered the parties respectively entitled to full and equal credit, but that, in their opinion, the testimony of a party defendant was not sufficient to prove a contract of this description, when opposed by testimony of the party plaintiff to the effect aforesaid. They, therefore found due to the plaintiff the sum of $ 8123, as the balance of the accounts, and also gave as interest thereon, from October 1, 1820, to June 1, 1828, the sum of $ 3736. The defendant filed exceptions to the report of the auditors, as well for their decision upon the legal effect of the testimony given, as for the allowance of interest upon the account; but the same was accepted by the county court, and final judgement being rendered thereon, this...