Legal Opinion

Ford v. Smead

Supreme Court of Vermont

Decided October 5, 1937PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPowers, C. J.

The plaintiff obtained a judgment against the defendant in the Hartford municipal court. The defendant then filed a petition for a new trial, which the plaintiff moved to dis miss. This motion was overruled and a new trial granted. The plaintiff excepted.

P. L. 2114 provides that a petition for a new trial shall not issue until the proper court has taken a recognizance to the adverse party conditioned that “if the petitioner fails to prosecute his petition to effect or finally to recover in such action, he will pay the adverse party the intervening damages and costs accruing by reason of such…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Holden v. CampbellSupreme Court of Vermont · 1929

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Howe v. Lisbon Savings Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1940
  2. Cusack v. Prudential Ins. Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
  3. Hayden v. Caledonia National BankSupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
  4. Wescott v. BriereSupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
  5. Howe v. Lisbon Savings Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1940

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

Powered by the Exa API