Isaacs v. Wiley
Supreme Court of Vermont
Both these cases were argued and considered together. The first was ejectment for lot No. 8, in the fourth range, in the town of Eden. Plea, not guilty and trial by jury.
Read the full summary
Both these cases were argued and considered together. The first was ejectment for lot No. 8, in the fourth range, in the town of Eden. Plea, not guilty and trial by jury. Upon the trial in the county court the plaintiff having shown a title to the land in his intestate and that the defendant, Wiley, was the tenant of the other defendants, the defendants offered in evidence a deed, dated February 3,1831, from Jonas Stone, collector of a land tax, to the defendants, Elkins and Chandler, and also the records of a vendue sale of the land in question, being the same vendue stated and considered by…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, J.
— In the first of these cases, the defendants’ title, and in the second case the plaintiff’s title, depends upon the competence of evidence, offered by them respectively, in support of two collector’s sales of the lands in question. The proceedings in support of the first sale have already been held defective, in the case of Isaacs, Administrator, v. Shattuch. Many of the exceptions taken in this case to the other sale were overruled in the former case alluded to. I shall now confine my remarks to those exceptions, which were not then…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Choen v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Northern Trust Co. v. PerrySupreme Court of Vermont · 1933
- Langdon v. PoorSupreme Court of Vermont · 1847
- Martin v. BarbourUnited States Circuit Court · 1888
- Walbridge v. KibbeeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.