Wallace v. Farnsworth
Supreme Court of Vermont
IN ERROR. Oyer of the record craved, et in nullo est erratum pleaded. Upon inspection of the record, it appeared, That Wallace, the plaintiff, had impleaded the defendant in an action of ejectment, in the novel mode of bringing such action, provided by the 88th section of the judiciary act, which is, " that instead of the circuitous mode of prosecuting for the recovery of landed property, heretofore used in this State, any person having claim to the seisin and possession of…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. Oyer of the record craved, et in nullo est erratum pleaded. Upon inspection of the record, it appeared, That Wallace, the plaintiff, had impleaded the defendant in an action of ejectment, in the novel mode of bringing such action, provided by the 88th section of the judiciary act, which is, " that instead of the circuitous mode of prosecuting for the recovery of landed property, heretofore used in this State, any person having claim to the seisin and possession of lands, tenements and hereditaments, shall have an action by writ of ejectment, according to the nature of the case as…
1Opinion of the Court
Üuria.
The Court are decidedly of opinion, that the County Court erred in suffering the plea or motion in abatement to be filed after the general issue had been pleaded and joined, and after imparlance, An abatement being a dilatory plea, should not be pleaded after imparlance, and surely not after the general issue had been pleaded and joined; but it is probable in this instance, the County Court considered itself bound to depart from the general rule of practice by the words of the statute, which are, “ that if any such action shall be otherwise brought, the same shall on motion be abated,”…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Barrows v. McGowanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1867