Wellman v. Bulkley
Supreme Court of Vermont
This was an action of covenant broken, brought to the county court, where by an agreement of the parties it was referred to the determination of three referees. The following is a copy of the agreement: “John Wellman vs. Henry. Bulkley. It is agreed to refer this cause to M. Clark, R. H. Blackmer, and Samuel Can-held, by rule of this court. S. Swiet, attorney for plaintiff. L. Sargeant, attorney for defendant.”
Read the full summary
This was an action of covenant broken, brought to the county court, where by an agreement of the parties it was referred to the determination of three referees. The following is a copy of the agreement: “John Wellman vs. Henry. Bulkley. It is agreed to refer this cause to M. Clark, R. H. Blackmer, and Samuel Can-held, by rule of this court. S. Swiet, attorney for plaintiff. L. Sargeant, attorney for defendant.” The docket entry was, that the cause is “ referred to M. Clark, R. H. Blackmer, and Samuel Canfield.” The order made by the clerk was as follows: “ It is ordered by the court, by the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Williams, C. J.
— It appears that this case was referred— that the rule was taken out in the usual form and a report made by the referees, or a major part of them. There was an additional statement made by one of the referees, but this is no part of the report or case before us. It would be unsafe to permit a statement made by one of the referees to have any effect on the question of the accepting or rejecting their report. The county court it appears, very properly rejected this statement, and nothing was left but a general report, to which no valid…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Griffin v. Champlain Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Vermont · 1878