Fullam v. Ives
Supreme Court of Vermont
Complaint for costs. It was proved that a writ in the name of said Ives, as plaintiff, against said Fullam, returnable to the May Term, 1864, of Windsor County Court, was duly served on said Fullam ; that said suit was not entered in court; that Fullam in the course of the week next preceding said May Term was verbally notified that the suit would not be entered, and that it was dropped; that Fullam is an attorney and accustomed to attend regularly the terms of the county…
Read the full summary
Complaint for costs. It was proved that a writ in the name of said Ives, as plaintiff, against said Fullam, returnable to the May Term, 1864, of Windsor County Court, was duly served on said Fullam ; that said suit was not entered in court; that Fullam in the course of the week next preceding said May Term was verbally notified that the suit would not be entered, and that it was dropped; that Fullam is an attorney and accustomed to attend regularly the terms of the county court in Windsor County. The only question was whether verbal notice was sufficient. Upon these facts the court, at the…
1Opinion of the Court
Poland, Ch. J.
The statute provides that, “ if any person shall cause process to be served on another for any matter or cause, and discontinue his suit, or be non-suit therein, or when such suit shall be abated and dismissed for want of jurisdiction, the court to which *660such, process is made returnable shall give judgment for the defendant to recover reasonable costs.” G. S. 267, § 42. In Griffin v. Farwell, 20 Vt. 153, it was said by Hall, J., “By the terms of this statute it would seem to have reference to the withdrawal of a suit, after it has been entered in court. But by an equitable…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Griffin v. FarwellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1848
- Mead v. ArmsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1829
- Clark v. ScofieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1844
3Cited by1 opinion
- Woods v. DarlingSupreme Court of Vermont · 1899