Briggs v. Town of Georgia
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit for work and labor done by plaintiff as attorney for the defendant. Plea, general issue ; and trial by jury.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit for work and labor done by plaintiff as attorney for the defendant. Plea, general issue ; and trial by jury. The plaintiff, to maintain the issue on his,part, introduced in evidence the docket of the county court, for March term, 1833, by which-it appeared that a suit was then pending in said court, in favor of Ethan Austin v. The town of Georgia; and also the docket of the said court, for the August and March terms then next following, from which it appeared, that, at the said August term, another suit was entered on said docket, in favor of the same Austin…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Hebard, J.
The first point made in the case is the decision of the county court, in excluding the pocket docket of the plaintiff from going to the jury as evidence. And, in this decision, we discover no such error as would justify us in sending the case back for a new trial. It cannot reasonably be supposed that the jury would have come to any different result, if this docket had been before them. The question was not whether the plaintiff had rendered the services for which he claimed pay, but whether, at the time he was rendering those services, he…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- People v. JewettNew York Supreme Court · 1831
3Cited by21 opinions
- United States v. Amazon Industrial Chemical CorporationDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1931
- Hurford v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1876
- Wassum v. FeeneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1876
- State v. KoveosSupreme Court of Vermont · 1999
- State v. BrockhausSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.