Evarts v. Town of Middlebury
Supreme Court of Vermont
Case for damages occasioned by the insufficiency of highway. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, December Term, 1878, Pierpoint, Ch. J., presiding. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in not having his horses properly shod.
Read the full summary
Case for damages occasioned by the insufficiency of highway. Plea, the general issue, and trial by jury, December Term, 1878, Pierpoint, Ch. J., presiding. The defendant claimed that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in not having his horses properly shod. To support the claim in that direction, the defendant introduced in evidence the shoes that were on the feet of the horse that was killed in going over the bank ; and to further support defendant’s claim in this direction, one Loring Howard, a blacksmith, and accustomed to shoeing of horses, as it appeared, was introduced…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Barrett, J.
In this case the court does not find occasion or need to review the cases involving questions as to expert testimony, either for the purpose of defining such testimony, or of stating the rules to which it is subjected in application.
To the extent to which the witness testified as an expert, as the court understand and construe the exceptions, objection seems hardly to be made in the argument. Plaintiff’s counsel seems to regard the exceptions as presenting the witness, testifying as an expert, “ whether the horse was too smoothly shod to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Sneda v. LiberaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1896