Danforth v. Reynolds
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit, for the recovery of ascertain sum specified in the plaintiffs’ declaration, to which the defendant pleaded the general issue. The cause was tried in' the County Court at the August Term, 1827, Ch. Justice SkxNNeb,, presiding.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, for the recovery of ascertain sum specified in the plaintiffs’ declaration, to which the defendant pleaded the general issue. The cause was tried in' the County Court at the August Term, 1827, Ch. Justice SkxNNeb,, presiding. The plaintiffs, to maintain the issue on their part, offered the deposition of Samuel Duncan, to which the defendant objected, on the ground that it was not taken according to the form prescribed by the laws of this state. The plaintiffs then offered parol evidence to showthat it was taken according to:the form required by the laws of…
1Opinion of the Court
Hutchinson J.
delivered the opinion of the court. This case presents a question in which the court have met with no difficulty; and yet itis of some importance, in point ofpractice. Depositions are very frequently taken in the neighboring states to be used in this state ; and, when the form of caption required by our statute is not sent to be used as a guide, they will not be apt to conform to'it, and must be rejected,unless taken according; to the laws of the state where taken; and, in that case, die party producing the deposition is under the necessity of showing to the court what ihe law…
2Cited by6 opinions
- State v. AbbeySupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Morrisette v. Canadian Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1902
- Land Finance Corp. v. St. Johnsbury Wiring Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1927
- Barron v. PettesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1846
- Johnson v. PerrySupreme Court of Vermont · 1882
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.