Kittridge v. Rollins
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of trespass for taking certain articles of personal property. The suit was brought to the county court. The ad damnum, in the writ, exceeded one hundred dollars. Plea, — the general issue.
Read the full summary
This was an action of trespass for taking certain articles of personal property. The suit was brought to the county court. The ad damnum, in the writ, exceeded one hundred dollars. Plea, — the general issue. The property in question was proved by the plaintiff, in establishing his case, not to exceed $30 or $40 in value; whereuPon the defendants moved to dismiss the action for want of jurisdiction in the court. q^g court; considering that from all the proof on the part of the plaintiff, that he had no good ground to expect that he could, in any event, recover moré than $100, sustained the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, J.
— In this case the action is trespass de bonis, originally sued in the county court. There being no testimony on the part of the plaintiff, tending to show the property sued for of greater value than forty dollars, and no proof offered tending to enhance the damages beyond the value of the property, the county court, on motion of the defendant, dismissed the suit for want of jurisdiction.
The action of trespass for goods is, no doubt, in some sense, an open action, in regard to damages. Cases will sometimes occur when, in consequence of the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Henry v. TilsonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1845
- Strong v. DanielsMichigan Supreme Court · 1855
- Joyal v. BarneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1848
- Sanborn & Catlin v. ChittendenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
- Doubleday v. MarstinSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854