Sanders v. Pierce
Supreme Court of Vermont
Trespass vi et armis. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September term, 1895, Windham County. Verdict for the plaintiff. After verdict and before judgment the defendant moved to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Motion overruled. The defendant excepts. The defect being one of process, the defendant waived it by pleading to the merits. Huntly v. Henry, 37 Vt. 165 ; Eaton v. Houghton, 1 Ails. 380; Hammond dé Drafer v. Wilder & Locke, 25 Vt. 349; Lyman v. C. V. Rd.
Read the full summary
Trespass vi et armis. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September term, 1895, Windham County. Verdict for the plaintiff. After verdict and before judgment the defendant moved to dismiss for want of jurisdiction. Motion overruled. The defendant excepts. The defect being one of process, the defendant waived it by pleading to the merits. Huntly v. Henry, 37 Vt. 165 ; Eaton v. Houghton, 1 Ails. 380; Hammond dé Drafer v. Wilder & Locke, 25 Vt. 349; Lyman v. C. V. Rd. Co., 59 Vt. 167; Lamfhere v. Co-wen, 42 Vt. 175. The exceptions do not state the ground on which the defendant relied. .…
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
This is an action of trespass vi et armis brought originally in the County court. The ad damnum of the writ is five dollars. The defendant appeared, plead the general issue, and a trial by jury was had, resulting in a verdict for the plaintiff for eight dollars and thirty-two cents damages. After verdict and before judgment, the defendant moved to dismiss the suit for want of jurisdiction. His motion did not specify the precise ground upon which he bases his claim that the county court had no jurisdiction of the action, but it alleged that such ground appeared from the writ to which reference…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- French v. HoltSupreme Court of Vermont · 1884
- Southwick v. Reuben MerrillSupreme Court of Vermont · 1830
- Stoughton v. MottSupreme Court of Vermont · 1841
- Niles v. HoweSupreme Court of Vermont · 1885
- Glidden v. ElkinsSupreme Court of Vermont · 1802
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lowery v. State Life InsuranceIndiana Supreme Court · 1899
- Petraska v. National Acme Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1921
- State v. HirschSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
- Miner's v. ShanasySupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
- Fillmore v. Estate of MorganSupreme Court of Vermont · 1919
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.