Legal Opinion

Skinner v. Buchanan

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided May 11, 1928PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSlack, J.

This action is to recover damages which plaintiff claims to have sustained by reason of the cutting of two shade trees, a maple and a poplar, that formerly stood in front of premises owned and occupied by her, which premises abut the easterly line of Maple Street in the village of Orleans, but do not include any part of that street. At the close of all the evidence defendants moved for a directed verdict on two grounds which, in effect, were: (1) That in cutting said trees defendant Buchanan was acting within the scope of his authority as tree warden of said village and the other two…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Sauer v. City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Donahue v. . Keystone Gas Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
  3. Cole v. DrewSupreme Court of Vermont · 1871
  4. Daniels v. HathawaySupreme Court of Vermont · 1892
  5. Holden v. ShattuckSupreme Court of Vermont · 1861

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Okemo Mountain, Inc. v. Town of LudlowSupreme Court of Vermont · 2000
  2. Ferraro v. EarleSupreme Court of Vermont · 1933
  3. Lynch v. Town Council of GeorgetownCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1935
  4. Steven Daiello v. Town of Vernon v. Dale A. Merritt and Brenda MerrittSupreme Court of Vermont · 2022
  5. Northio Theatres Corp. v. 226 Main Street Hotel Corp.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1950

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API