Hill v. Cox
Supreme Court of Vermont
Case, to recover for personal injuries caused by the defendant’s dog. Heard by the court, September Term, 1881, Veazey, J., presiding. Judgment for the plaintiff. The case is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redfield, J.
The only question reserved in this case is, whether the certificate that the cause of action arose from the wilful and malicious act, or neglect of the defendant, was properly allowed.
I. When the action is such, that a certificate may be allowed, the awarding a certificate by the court which tried the facts, is ordinarily a matter of discretion, upon the exercise of which no error can be predicated. When the facts specially reported are such as legally warrant a certificate, this court will not, on exceptions, disturb the order of the…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Wellman v. MeadSupreme Court of Vermont · 1919
- Healy, Admr. v. MooreSupreme Court of Vermont · 1936
- Judd v. BallardSupreme Court of Vermont · 1894
- Mullin v. FlandersSupreme Court of Vermont · 1901
- Buchanan v. CookSupreme Court of Vermont · 1897
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.