West River Bank v. Gorham
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action on the Case. The case was referred, and upon the referee’s report, at the April Term, 1864, Barrett, J. presiding, the court, pro forma, rendered judgment for the defendant, to which the plaintiff excepted. The facts found by the referee' are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court.
Read the full summary
Action on the Case. The case was referred, and upon the referee’s report, at the April Term, 1864, Barrett, J. presiding, the court, pro forma, rendered judgment for the defendant, to which the plaintiff excepted. The facts found by the referee' are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the court. After the liens created by the attachments on the property ordered to be attached previous to the plaintiff’s attachment, as referred to in the opinion, were satisfied there were several hundred dollars in value in said property remaining.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Pierpoint, Ch. J.
This is an action against the defendant, as sheriff of Windham county, in two counts. First, for neglect in not levying an execution upon a quantity of hemlock bark. Second, for the neglect of Wm. H. Carr, a deputy of the defendant, in neglecting to attach the same bark, on the original writ in the same case.
It appears from the report of the referee to whom this case was referred, that on the 4th day of January, 1861, the plaintiff had a note against John S. Parsons and Moses J. Bogle for 400 dollars; that said Bogle was surety for…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Paul v. BurtonSupreme Court of Vermont · 1859
- Rogers v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Vermont · 1864
3Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson v. BeattieSupreme Court of Vermont · 1915
- Pond v. BakerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1885
- Keniston v. StevensSupreme Court of Vermont · 1894
- Humphrey v. WheelerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1918