Howard v. Bartlett
Supreme Court of Vermont
Replevin of cattle. Plea the general issue. Trial by jury at the September Term, 1897, Windham County, Ross, C. J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant excepted. The third request to charge, referred to in the opinion, was, that if, at the time the writ was served, the cattle were restrained by defendant, but had not been restrained twenty-four hours, the plaintiff could not recover.
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
The defendant contends that it was error for the court below not to comply with his first request to charge the jury, which was as follows: “If there was no usable public pound in Guilford, defendant had a right to take and restrain cattle found damage feasant upon his premises, and had twenty-four hours from the time of so taking and restraining them in which to notify the owner, and his detention of them during such twenty-four hours was not unlawful.” Unless this request embodied a sound proposition of law applicable to the case on trial, it was not error to deny it. It assumes that the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hall & Chase v. J. & J. H. Peck, & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1838
- Stanley v. TurnerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1896
- Hawley v. SoperSupreme Court of Vermont · 1846
3Cited by4 opinions
- Morgan v. KroupaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1997
- City of Burlington v. Burlington Traction Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1898
- Vosburgh v. KimballSupreme Court of Vermont · 1971
- Morgan v. KroupaSupreme Court of Vermont · 1997