Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Citizens Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Fitchburg Mutual Fire Insurance

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided June 2, 1913Published

Assumpsit on a fire insurance policy. The only question at issue was the amount of the defendant’s liability. Trial by jury at-the December Term, 1912, Caledonia County, Waterman, J., presiding. Verdict determining the plaintiff’s loss and judgment thereon. The defendant excepted. The opinion states the case. This case has been once before in the Supreme Court. See 86 Vt. 267.

1ConcurrencePowers, J.

I concur in the result, but dissent from the opinion of the majority on exception No. 53, which concerns the testimony of Mr. Ritchie, the plaintiff’s treasurer. It seems to me that the testimony regarding the price at which the ruins were offered for sale and the person to whom they were offered were, as the case stood, plainly inadmissible, and if properly excepted to, its admission would be harmful and reversible error. All this evidence was admitted for was to allow the witness to correct a former statement. This is plainly apparent from the record; and in order clearly to present my…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Slack v. BraggSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910
  2. Laurent v. VaughnSupreme Court of Vermont · 1858
  3. State v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1900
  4. Weeks v. BarronSupreme Court of Vermont · 1866
  5. Wead v. St. Johnsbury & Lake Champlain Rd.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1894

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API