Cummings v. Brock
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action on the case, brought upon chapter 102 of the General S tatutes. Plea, general issue, and notice that the defendant was administrator of the estate of Levi Boutwell, and had no interest, personally, in the fence in question; that the fence divided the lands of the plaintiff and of said estate, etc. Heard by the court, March Term, 1881, "Washington Comity, Tart, J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Action on the case, brought upon chapter 102 of the General S tatutes. Plea, general issue, and notice that the defendant was administrator of the estate of Levi Boutwell, and had no interest, personally, in the fence in question; that the fence divided the lands of the plaintiff and of said estate, etc. Heard by the court, March Term, 1881, "Washington Comity, Tart, J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff. On trial no question was made but that the fence was upon the dividing line between the lands of the plaintiff and the lands of said estate; or that the defendant was administrator of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Eoyce, Ch. J.
This was an action on the case brought upon Chap. 102 of the General Statutes, to recover' the expense of building a portion of a division fence. , Under the plea of the general issue, it was incumbent upon the plaintiff to show that the fence had been so divided as to make it the duty of the defendant to build that portion of it that was built by the plaintiff. The evidence introduced by the plaintiff and upon which he based his right of recovery, shows unmistakably that whatever contract he made with the defendant in relation to the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Harrington v. RichSupreme Court of Vermont · 1831