Clapp v. Foster
Supreme Court of Vermont
Book Account. The cause was entered in tire county court at the June term, 1857, in Franklin County. At that term the attorneys for the parties consented to the appointment of B. H. Smalley as auditor, knowing at the time that Mr. Smalley’s wife was first cousin of the defendant’s wife, but the fact of such relationship did not at that time occur to the plaintiff’s attorney, Mr. Smalley was accordingly appointed auditor.
Read the full summary
Book Account. The cause was entered in tire county court at the June term, 1857, in Franklin County. At that term the attorneys for the parties consented to the appointment of B. H. Smalley as auditor, knowing at the time that Mr. Smalley’s wife was first cousin of the defendant’s wife, but the fact of such relationship did not at that time occur to the plaintiff’s attorney, Mr. Smalley was accordingly appointed auditor. The plaintiff shortly afteiwards took, out the rule in the cause and procured Mr. Smalley to appoint a time to audit the'accounts of the par-, ties, but the cause was not…
1Opinion of the Court
Poland, Ch. J.
The principal question which has been made by thfe defendant in this case, is the alleged error of the county court in setting aside the report made by Mr. Smalley, the first auditor, and sending the case out to be tried by another. Eor my own part, I should be entirely satisfied to treat this action of the court below as an exercise of the mere discretion of that tribunal, which cannot be made a ground of legal error, and so not properly revisable by this court. It would not, I think, be claimed by any one, that the county court might not remove an auditor and appoint another,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Churchill v. ChurchillSupreme Court of Vermont · 1839
3Cited by4 opinions
- Smith v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Manistee National Bank v. SeymourMichigan Supreme Court · 1887
- Davidson v. WhitehillSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
- Thayer v. GlynnSupreme Court of Vermont · 1919