Mossman v. Bostridge
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass for killing a dog. " Pleas, the general' issue, and plea in justification. Heard on general demurrer to the second plea, at the March Term, 1904, Orleans County, Haselton, J., presiding. Dem-urrer overruled, and plea adjudged sufficient. The plaintiff excepted, and the case was passed to the Supreme Court before trial on the merits. The opinion states the substance of the plea in question.
Read the full summary
Trespass for killing a dog. " Pleas, the general' issue, and plea in justification. Heard on general demurrer to the second plea, at the March Term, 1904, Orleans County, Haselton, J., presiding. Dem-urrer overruled, and plea adjudged sufficient. The plaintiff excepted, and the case was passed to the Supreme Court before trial on the merits. The opinion states the substance of the plea in question. The plea is bad in that it does not confess the trespass-alleged in the declaration. Chit. PI. (14 Am. ed.) Vol. i, 501, Vol. Ill, 1096. The plea is also bad in failing to allege that defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtRowell, C. J.
This is trespass for killing a dog. The second plea, which follows the general issue, attempts to justify, and alleges that “on the day and date of the said supposed *411killing of said dog, said dog was by the defendant found pursuing, hunting, and chasing wild deer.” To this plea the defendant demurs generally, and objects that it is insufficient because it does not confess a cause of action. Without considering whether the objection can be taken advantage of ora general demurrer, it is clear that the plea gives good color in the words, “the said supposed killing of said dog,” and consequently…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Webster v. State Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1908
- Heideman v. KelseyIllinois Supreme Court · 1956
- Villa v. ThayerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
- Laner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1963
- Dutcher v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1912