Rogers v. Town of Shelburne
Supreme Court of Vermont
.Assumpsit* to recover a town bounty of $600. Plea, tbe general issue. Trial by jury, September term, 1869, Pierpoint, C. J., presiding.
Read the full summary
.Assumpsit* to recover a town bounty of $600. Plea, tbe general issue. Trial by jury, September term, 1869, Pierpoint, C. J., presiding. It appeared by certificates pf the assistant adjutant-general of the state, which were admitted in evidence under objection, that the plaintff furnished a substitute, one John Rules, who was duly enlisted and mustered into the service of the United States on the 10th day of- August, 1864, and was credited to the town of Shelburne, and applied in the reduction of the quota of said town under the call of the President of the United States, dated July 18,1864,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Wilson, J.
By the provisions of the statute of 1864, the desertion of the plaintiff’s substitute is not a bar to the action. This question was very fully considered in the case of Bingham v. Springfield, 41 Vt., 32, and the court say in that case that the statute, above referred to, can not be construed as intending to *552cut off a right of action already perfect when the statute was passed, even if the legislature had power to do so. The case of Hickok v. Shelburne, 41 Vt., 409, is decisive of the other points made in this case. Upon the authority of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hickok v. Town of ShelburneSupreme Court of Vermont · 1868
- Bingham v. Town of SpringfieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1868
3Cited by2 opinions
- Knox v. GerhauserMontana Supreme Court · 1878
- Bantz v. BasnettWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1877