Town of Rutland v. Paige
Supreme Court of Vermont
[In Chancery.] Appeal from the court of chancery. The court of chancery dismissed the cross bill, from which decree Thrall, the orator in the cross hill, appealed, he being one of the defendants in the original bill.
Read the full summary
[In Chancery.] Appeal from the court of chancery. The court of chancery dismissed the cross bill, from which decree Thrall, the orator in the cross hill, appealed, he being one of the defendants in the original bill. The defendants to the cross hill took the testimony of Abel Paige, one of the defendants to the original bill, which was brought. to compel the defendants to treat the bond as if their seals had been affixed at the time of signing, which by mistake they neglected to do. The testimony of the said Paige, the orator, in the cross bill, moved the court to suppress, on the ground that…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Rebpield, J.
The object of this hill is to require the defendants, who executed an official bond for the first defendant, as constable of the town of Rutland, except sealing, to treat the bond as sealed at the time of signing. The defendants in their answers all admit, that it was their intention to have sealed the bond at the time of signing. This will entitle the orators to the .decree they ask unless' some defense is made out, by. way of the cross bill.
The cross hill is brought by Thrall, one of the sureties, upon the ground that he having claims…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bank of Rutland v. ThrallSupreme Court of Vermont · 1834
3Cited by13 opinions
- Bernards Township v. StebbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Van Dyke v. ColeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1908
- McMullen v. EaganWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1882
- Ledwith v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of Florida · 1893
- Vermont Accident Insurance v. FletcherSupreme Court of Vermont · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.