Braley v. Burnham
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass for wool. Plea, the general issue, and justification under a tax-bill and warrant. Replication, de injuria, and joinder. Trial by jury, June term, 1874, Peck, J., presiding. The plea alleged, among other things, that on the 24th of May, 1869, the intestate had a list in the town of Chelsea, to the amount of $78.78. At the trial, the plaintiff gave evidence tending to prove the taking and carrying away of the wool as alleged.
Read the full summary
Trespass for wool. Plea, the general issue, and justification under a tax-bill and warrant. Replication, de injuria, and joinder. Trial by jury, June term, 1874, Peck, J., presiding. The plea alleged, among other things, that on the 24th of May, 1869, the intestate had a list in the town of Chelsea, to the amount of $78.78. At the trial, the plaintiff gave evidence tending to prove the taking and carrying away of the wool as alleged. The defendant produced Josiah Pitkin, one of the listers of said Chelsea for 1869, as a witness, who testified that he notified the intestate of his assessment,…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Powers, J.
No objection to the replication by way of demurrer or otherwise, was taken in the court below, but the trial proceeded •upon the ground that it put in issue the material averment in the plea that the intestate, on the 24th of May, 1869, had a list, &c. We think the grand list, made in proper form and duly authenticated, is all the evidence required of the defendant to support the issue made by a traverse of his averment that the tax-payer had a list. If the plaintiff would put the defendant to further proof as to the legality and validity of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Clark v. DowningSupreme Court of Vermont · 1882
- Johnson v. JonesSupreme Court of Vermont · 1910