Burgess v. Denison Paper Manufacturing Co.
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Akerley v. Lammi (Me. 1966)
- Sargent v. Donahue (Vt. 1920)
- Carpenter v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co. (S.D. 1895)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff has a claim against the defendants for labor. The defendants rely on an alleged accord and satisfaction, contending that the plaintiff agreed to take a deed from a third party in satisfaction of his claim. The defendants obtained the deed but did not deliver it, relying on the plaintiff to call for it. "The accord is the agreement for the reception of the thing in discharge of the debt; the satisfaction is the actual reception of the thing.” Whar. Con. § 996; Bragg v. Pierce 53 Maine, 65. Here there was accord but not satisfaction. The deed was not received. Nothing short of an actual reception of the deed would constitute a defense.
Exceptions overruled.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.