Town of St. Johnsbury v. Bagley
Supreme Court of Vermont
Appeal from the Court of Chancery. This was a bill to reform a deed from Ephraim Paddock to defendant Bagley, alleging that in the 5th course in the description, the word east was erroneously used instead of the word- west, whereby more land was conveyed than was intended to be; that Paddock willed all his real estate to his wife, who died, leaving it all to defendant Paddock, her son and sole heir, who had quit-claimed his interest in the land erroneously included in said…
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Court of Chancery. This was a bill to reform a deed from Ephraim Paddock to defendant Bagley, alleging that in the 5th course in the description, the word east was erroneously used instead of the word- west, whereby more land was conveyed than was intended to be; that Paddock willed all his real estate to his wife, who died, leaving it all to defendant Paddock, her son and sole heir, who had quit-claimed his interest in the land erroneously included in said deed, to the town of St. Johnsbury; that the other orators, as selectmen of the town, btd entered upon said land and…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Barrett, J.
The orators’ claim is rested on the ground that by mistake, Paddock’s deed to Bagley covers more land than was bargained and paid for by Bagley, and by so much more than was understood by Judge Paddock and Bagley to be covered and conveyed by that deed, and that the mistake consists in erroneously using east for west in the 5th course in the description. The *77property of Judge Paddock passed to his wife, and from his wife was inherited by his son Horace. Horace gave a quit-claim without consideration, to the orators, of the land in question.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Findlay v. LongeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1909
- Carroll v. McCulloughSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1884