Carpenter v. Town of Corinth
Supreme Court of Vermont
Action to recover for injuries- alleged to have been occasioned by the insufficiency of a highway. Trial by juryr June Term, 1884, Orange-County, Rowell, J., presiding. Judgment for the defendant.
Read the full summary
Action to recover for injuries- alleged to have been occasioned by the insufficiency of a highway. Trial by juryr June Term, 1884, Orange-County, Rowell, J., presiding. Judgment for the defendant. The exceptions stated: “Doe, one of the selectmen of the defendant town, was produced as a witness, on the part of the town, and was asked on the direct examination by counsel for the defendant whether he learned, of anybody who pretended to know, that the tracks of the plaintiff, either horse or wagon, went into that gully on that occasion. The question was objected to. The counsel for the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Royce, Ch. J.
This was an action brought to recover for injuries to the plaintiff’s person and property occasioned by the insufficiency of a highway.- The first exceptions taken were to the permitting certain questions to be put to the witnesses, James W. Doe and John B. Locke. It does not appear what answers were given to the questions. It is incumbent on the plaintiff to show that the answers were prejudicial to him. The court cannot presume that they were; and nothing here shows that they might not have been favorable to the plaintiff. The questions…
2Cited by11 opinions
- State v. CliffordWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
- Houston v. Brush & CurtisSupreme Court of Vermont · 1894
- State v. BurpeeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1892
- Smith v. Niagara Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1887
- Bingham v. LipmanOregon Supreme Court · 1901
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.