Templeton v. Clogston
Supreme Court of Vermont
TRESPASS and trover. Heard on demurrer to the declaration, March Term, 1887, Yeazey, J., presiding. The counts are sufficient. United States v. Ordway, 30 Fed. Rep. 30. There is not a misjoinder. 2 Chit. PI. 369 ; ITaslcin v. Record, 32 Yt. 575 ; Hogar v. Brainard, 44 Yt. 294; Blade v. Howard, 50 Yt. 27. cited 1 Chit.
Read the full summary
TRESPASS and trover. Heard on demurrer to the declaration, March Term, 1887, Yeazey, J., presiding. The counts are sufficient. United States v. Ordway, 30 Fed. Rep. 30. There is not a misjoinder. 2 Chit. PI. 369 ; ITaslcin v. Record, 32 Yt. 575 ; Hogar v. Brainard, 44 Yt. 294; Blade v. Howard, 50 Yt. 27. cited 1 Chit. PI. 199, 206 ; R. L. s. 912 ; Keyes v. Prescott, 32 Vt.- 86 ; &thinner v. Wilder, 38 Yt. 115; llagar v. Brainard, 44 Yt. 294; Blade v. Howard, 50 Yt. 27. The two counts do not embrace the same cause of action.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, Ch. J.
The declaration in this case was demurred to for misjoinder of counts. Demurrer sustained and judgment for defendant.
The declaration contains two counts, one in trespass, the other in trover. No question is made but this would have *629been a misjoinder at common law; and if allowable at all, it is under our-statute, R. L., sec. 912, which provides that “ counts in trespass may be joined with counts in trespass on the case, including trover, in one declaration, if for the same cause of action.”
It is not necessary that the declaration should…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Alger v. CurrySupreme Court of Vermont · 1866
- Black v. HowardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1877
3Cited by2 opinions
- Sawyer v. ChildsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910
- Slayton v. DavisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1911