Kellogg v. Higgins
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of the case ag'ainst the defendants, who were two of the selectmen of the town of Benson, for refusing to return, to the town clerk of said Benson, the plaintiff’s disclosure, under the statute, of the amount of his money on hand, debts due him, &c.,. by reason of which he was unjustly taxed, &c. Plea, general issue and trial by jury.
Read the full summary
This was an action of the case ag'ainst the defendants, who were two of the selectmen of the town of Benson, for refusing to return, to the town clerk of said Benson, the plaintiff’s disclosure, under the statute, of the amount of his money on hand, debts due him, &c.,. by reason of which he was unjustly taxed, &c. Plea, general issue and trial by jury. On the trial in the county court, it was agreed by the parties that, at the annual March meeting of the town of Benson in 1836, Daniel Crofoot, Dan Higgins and Edward H. Aiken, were duly appointed and sworn as selectmen, in and for said town…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Bennett, J.
The decision of the questions, raised in this case, must depend upon what we consider to be the sound exposition of the 13th section of the act passed Nov. 17th, 1825, relating to the duties of listers. This section provides, that when any person thinks he is assessed by the listers in a greater sum than is just and reasonable, such person may apply to the selectmen, or a majority of them of the same town, and make disclosure on oath before such selectmen, any one of whom is empowered to administer the oath. It is then made the duty of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- In Re MartinezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- E. & T. Fairbanks & Co. v. KittredgeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850