Nixon v. Barber & Phelps
Supreme Court of Vermont
Practice. Supreme court. In this case, pending in the county of Addison, the verdict and judgment being for the defendants, and the plaintiff having taken exceptions, the defendants, at the January Term, 1856, moved to dismiss-them, on the ground that they were not filed within thirty days after the adjournment of the county court, according to the statute requirement.
Read the full summary
Practice. Supreme court. In this case, pending in the county of Addison, the verdict and judgment being for the defendants, and the plaintiff having taken exceptions, the defendants, at the January Term, 1856, moved to dismiss-them, on the ground that they were not filed within thirty days after the adjournment of the county court, according to the statute requirement. The filing of the clerk upon the exceptions read “July % 1855,” the one date falling within the thirty days and the other not. The counsel proposed to show the facts in the case by oral evidence.
1Opinion of the Court
Bt the court.
As the record now stands it will be impossible to determine this motion. The county court must direct their clerk to make a definite entry of the time of filing the exceptions. Or if they should neglect upon proper request, to do so, the matter may undoubtedly be reached in some way. Or if, when made, either party claims that it is not according to the fact, we suppose, without doubt, in the appropriate mode, the record may be set right. But this court, many years since, in the case of Tufts v. Aiken, 13 Vt. 490, virtually decided this question. We have always refused to go into…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tufts v. AikenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1841