Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Railroad v. Cooper
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit to recover of the defendant three assessments upon ten shares of the plaintiffs’ capital stock, for which the defendant had subscribed.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit to recover of the defendant three assessments upon ten shares of the plaintiffs’ capital stock, for which the defendant had subscribed. The defendant plead in abatement to the writ that at the time when the suit was brought neither the plaintiffs nor the defendant resided in the' county of Windsor, where the writ was made returnable ; but that the defendant resided in Irasburgh, in Orleans county, and that the plaintiffs resided, and were actually located and kept their office at Coventry, in Orleans county, and that, therefore, the suit should have been brought in the county court…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, Ch. J.
The question presented in the present case is, where may a railway company be said to reside, for the purpose of bringing actions as plaintiff. There is no express statute upon the subject, except the general provision requiring actions to be *480brought in the county where one of the parties reside, if both reside in the state, as in the present case.
The statute of 1853, allowing actions against railway companies to be brought in any county into which their route extends, seems to have no proper bearing upon the question, inasmuch as this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- E. & T. Fairbanks & Co. v. KittredgeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850
3Cited by10 opinions
- Fairbanks Steam Shovel Co. v. WillsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1914
- Slavens v. South Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Home Protection of North Ala. v. Richards & SonsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1883
- Tobin v. Chester & Lenoir N. G. R. R.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1896
- Snyder v. Central Vermont Railway, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1941
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.