Cootey v. Remington
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtSlack, J.
This action is debt on a judgment alleged to have been obtained in the Rutland municipal court, April 18, 1935. Remington did not appear. The Pipe Company appeared and pleaded specially that plaintiff did not have a valid judgment against it; that on April 18, 1935, plaintiff obtained a judgment against Remington in the Rutland municipal court, in a suit wherein he was defendant and it was trustee, but did not on that, or any other day, obtain judgment against it; that on, to wit, April 8, 1936, the record of said court was altered and changed to read, “Judgment for plaintiff vs. defendant…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Dwight v. HazlettWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1929
- Warner v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1924
- Weed v. WeedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1856
- Cty. Bank of San Luis Obispo v. JackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
- Lowry v. CadySupreme Court of Vermont · 1832
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- R. E. Bean Construction Co. v. Middlebury Associates & Middlebury Developers, Inc.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1980
- Nichols v. NicholsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1982
- City of Barre v. Town of OrangeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1981
- RE Bean Const. v. MIDDLEBURY, ETC.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1980