Fowler v. Pratt
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of trespass upon the case for removing the turnpike gate of the Woodstock and Royalton turnpike company, in Woodstock, on the 12th day of March, 1838. The defendants pleaded the general issue, with notice that said gate was a nuisance and obstruction, erected by said turnpike company, without law or right, across the highway in said Woodstock, and that th.e defendants, as selectmen of said town, after having njade and served upon said company an order in…
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass upon the case for removing the turnpike gate of the Woodstock and Royalton turnpike company, in Woodstock, on the 12th day of March, 1838. The defendants pleaded the general issue, with notice that said gate was a nuisance and obstruction, erected by said turnpike company, without law or right, across the highway in said Woodstock, and that th.e defendants, as selectmen of said town, after having njade and served upon said company an order in writing to remove said gate, with which order the said company had neglected and refused to comply, re- ' moved said gate…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, C. J.
In this case the court are called upon to investigate a question, which was presented to their consideration and decided in this county, in March, 1833, and in relation to the rights of the same corporation, whose treasurer now brings this suit. The case is not reported, but it cannot have escaped recollection that the points, now raised, were then raised, discussed and decided.
The question is, whether the Royal ton and Woodstock Turnpike Company, having once erected a gate or gates on their road, have a right to remove them, or whether the gates must be considered as fixed and established,…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Pettes v. Bank of WhitehallSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Way v. FellowsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
- President of the Baltimore & Fredericktown Turnpike Co. v. RoutzahnCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1883