Ballou v. Ballou
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trover for four horses, four harnesses, four whiffietrees, two neck-yokes, and one wagon. The defendant Salisbury pleaded in abatement, “ and says he “ ought not to be compelled to answer to said writ and declaration “ because he says that the said Maturin Ballou, on the 14th day of “ October, A. D. 1852, prayed out from John Roberts, Esquire, of “ Whitingham, in said Windham County, then and still a justice of . “ the peace for said county, a writ of trover against said…
Read the full summary
Trover for four horses, four harnesses, four whiffietrees, two neck-yokes, and one wagon. The defendant Salisbury pleaded in abatement, “ and says he “ ought not to be compelled to answer to said writ and declaration “ because he says that the said Maturin Ballou, on the 14th day of “ October, A. D. 1852, prayed out from John Roberts, Esquire, of “ Whitingham, in said Windham County, then and still a justice of . “ the peace for said county, a writ of trover against said Salisbury “ and one Willard A. Dennison, of said Whitingham, returnable be- “ fore said Roberts, justice of the peace at…
1Opinion of the Court
*675The opinion of the court was delivered by
Rep field, Ch. J.
The plea itself it seems to us is insufficient, upon its merits. The suits are neither between the same parties, or for the same thing, as sufficiently appears by the plea itself. So that it is very questionable whether the second suit, under the circumstances, can be regarded as vexatious. Because a second suit is for some of the same things, sued for in a former suit, still pending, it will scarcely do to say, that it will abate, either in whole, or in part, the other suit. And the averment, that a suit for one harness is for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Hill v. DunlapSupreme Court of Vermont · 1843
3Cited by4 opinions
- Glasser, Kuder & Ottensoser v. HackettSupreme Court of Florida · 1896
- Dunklee v. GoodenoughSupreme Court of Vermont · 1893
- Gamsby v. RaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1872
- Central Railroad v. N. J. West Line RailroadNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1880