Briggs v. Bennett
Supreme Court of Vermont
. Trespass for taking and driving away twenty-five yearlings. The case was referred under a rule of court to referees, who reported in substance: That the plaintiff leased to one Jonathan and John G. Taggart, a farm in Richmond, with the tools and stock thereon, for two yeai'S, from April first, 1849, and referred to a certain written lease between plaintiff and one Stearns.
Read the full summary
. Trespass for taking and driving away twenty-five yearlings. The case was referred under a rule of court to referees, who reported in substance: That the plaintiff leased to one Jonathan and John G. Taggart, a farm in Richmond, with the tools and stock thereon, for two yeai'S, from April first, 1849, and referred to a certain written lease between plaintiff and one Stearns. That by the contract between plaintiff and the Taggarts, the cows put on the farm were to belong to the plaintiff till the Taggarts paid for one half of them. That the Taggarts were to raise twenty-five calves from the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Redeield, Ch. J.
We are not aware that any different principle is involved in this case, from that decided in the same plaintiff v. Oaks.
I. If the form of action was misconceived, that will not be fatal to plaintiff’s right to recover upon the report in his favor, inasmuch as it was the case referred, which will allow the plaintiff to present any case which he could have shown in court, either on the first declaration, or any which it was competent for the court to allow him to file. And as the power of amendment extends even to the changing the form of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Gray v. StevensSupreme Court of Vermont · 1855
- Willmarth v. PrattSupreme Court of Vermont · 1884