Case ID: vt_27/html/0783-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bt the court.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

John B. Nixon v. Barber & Phelps.
    
      Practice. Supreme court.
    
    The supreme court will not decide, upon proof by affidavits, or from tbo statements of counsel, a disputed question respecting the correctness of the records or minutes of another court, unless it be presented to them by a petition for a mandamus or other proper writ, upon which, a determination can be made which will be conclusive upon all who may be affected by the conclusion arrived at.
    In this case, pending in the county of Addison, the verdict and judgment being for the defendants, and the plaintiff having taken exceptions, the defendants, at the January Term, 1856, moved to dismiss-them, on the ground that they were not filed within thirty days after the adjournment of the county court, according to the statute requirement.
    The filing of the clerk upon the exceptions read “July % 1855,” the one date falling within the thirty days and the other not. The counsel proposed to show the facts in the case by oral evidence.
   Bt the court.

As the record now stands it will be impossible to determine this motion. The county court must direct their clerk to make a definite entry of the time of filing the exceptions. Or if they should neglect upon proper request, to do so, the matter may undoubtedly be reached in some way. Or if, when made, either party claims that it is not according to the fact, we suppose, without doubt, in the appropriate mode, the record may be set right. But this court, many years since, in the case of Tufts v. Aiken, 13 Vt. 490, virtually decided this question. We have always refused to go into proof, upon affidavits, or statements of counsel and others, in regard to the correctness of a record of other courts. Such proceeding, the parties chiefly interested in the question, not being before the court, could determine nothing definitively. The proceeding should be taken, by mandamus, or other proper writ, served upon the court or officer, whose proceedings are proposed to be affected, and the opposite party, often, and regularly always perhaps, so that when once determined, it will be final upon all concerned.

The case must be continued to enable the parties to take such proceedings, as they deem proper.