Dano v. Sessions
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action on the case. Trial by jury at the June term, 1892, Taft, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiffs. The defendant excepts. The case appears in the head notes and opinion. The déed -had no tendency to support the -declaration. Wright v. Geer, 6 Vt. 151; Vail.v. Strong, 10 Vt. 457? Mann v. Birchard, 40 Vt. 326.
1Opinion of the CourtStart, J.
The plaintiffs offered in evidence a warranty deed of the premises, described in the declaration, executed by Hiram C. Sessions, a brother of the defendant, to the plaintiffs. The defendant objected to the admission of this deed, on the ground'that it did not support the declaration, and had no tendency to prove the contract set forth therein; and after the evidence was closed the defendant moved the court fo diréfct a verdict for the defendant, on the ground that the plaintiffs’ evidence did not support their declaration, but fatally varied therefrom.
It does not, appear that any particular…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Morey v. King, Fuller & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1877
- Deakin v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Holdridge v. Holdridge's EstateSupreme Court of Vermont · 1881
- Dano v. SessionsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1891
3Cited by6 opinions
- Gustafson v. RustemeyerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
- McDuffee's Admx. v. Boston & Maine RailroadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1908
- Fitzsimons v. Richardson, Twigg & Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1912
- Maidment v. FrazierSupreme Court of Vermont · 1916
- Gibson v. WheldonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1909
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.