Legal Opinion

Grover v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 1, 1956No. 1122Published

1Opinion

On Motion For Eear^ument

Adams, J.

The purpose of a motion for reargument is to point out matters presented in the brief and relied upon in oral argument which it is thought were overlooked or misapprehended by this Court in reviewing the case. Basso v. Veysey, 118 Vt 399, 405, 110 A2d 706, Horicon v. Langlois, 115 Vt 81, 88, 52 A2d 888, and cases there cited.

The motion of the plaintiff claims, (2) that there was no evidence that there were no endorsements on the policy; (3) that she should not be deprived of the consideration of her exceptions because she did not file a bill of exceptions; (4)…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Horicon v. Estate of LangloisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1947
  2. Jones v. Gay's Express, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1939
  3. Basso v. VeyseySupreme Court of Vermont · 1954
  4. Lavigne v. RossettiSupreme Court of Vermont · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API