Kimball v. Lamson
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of assumpsit brought against David B. Lamson, and Nathan Lamson, the latter of whom had suffered a default.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit brought against David B. Lamson, and Nathan Lamson, the latter of whom had suffered a default. At the trial in the County Court, the defendant, David B. Lamson, pleaded in abatement, that' the Justice of the Peace, before whom the cause was originally commenced, had adjourned the trial for a longer period than three months, that is, from the 26th day of January, 1828, to the 25th day of April, 1828. The Court overruled the plea of abatement, and ordered the said deiendant to answer over. To which decision the defendant’s counsel excepted. The cause then…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was pronounced by
Paddock, J.
The first question, presented by this case, arises upon the construction to be given to the nineteenth section of the act defining the powers of Justices of the peace; which is in the following words, to wit, “ that every Justice of the peace shall “ have power to adjourn the trial of any civil action brought be- “ fore him to such future time as may be proper, not exceeding “ three monthswhether it shall be construed to mean solar or lunar months.
The Court are aware, that in all judicial proceedings in England, in the reckoning of time,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hartness v. ThompsonNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Commonwealth v. WardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
3Cited by8 opinions
- McDaniels v. LaphamSupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
- Sprague v. NorwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
- Gross v. FowlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
- Bartol v. CalvertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1852
- Evilsizor v. SpeckbaughOhio Court of Appeals · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.