Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1847-04-16
court Calcnoar.
CMITTENDEN COUNTY.
County Court
Reported for the Free Press.


ESQ STEPHENS Henry IIoDGEs This ac
ton of assumpst to recover for the use and occupa.
ZION of brick store in Richmond The defence relied
ON vas that the rent had been paid but in the accide
tai absence of witnesses and papers, evidence was
offered and verdict was taken for the plaintiff Tor
8
KAssoy & CnlTTENpEN for plaintiff
BRiGss X UNDERWOOD. and MAYNARD Tor del T.
JOsrru SNirH u The VT. CEN K. r. Co.-This was
An appeal from the decision OF the Commissioners to
appraise damages for lands taken for the purposes of
the road The came up on an application
BY the plaintiff Tor jury trial on the assessment oil
damages As there were a number OF similar cases
standing for trial. the motion was heard as Tor oil the
After argument by Smaey & Phelps for the plain
tiff and a. Peck Pau for the defendant, the Court
minated opinion that the general statute OF 1916
giving Jury trial where damages were TO be assessed
and where other mode oftria was provided by law,
did not aiicc, the qcstlon in any way. Because ii no
other mode OF trial was provided by law, the party
would be entitled TO trial by jury independent OF that
statute And on thegeneral question whether any 9TH
er mode OF trial is provided by law in these cases, the
court declined expressing an opinion but said that as
there was number OF cases, the trial OF which would
necessarily be attended with good dca OF expense, it
desirable that the question should be definitely
settle before the trials were had And that in that
view the application would be denied pro lorna and
the continued TO give an opportunity TO bring
petition TO the Supreme Court for mandamus. This
course was accordingly adopted
J. 81. II PEcK & Co. ASA SAwYHR.-This WINS
an action the recover damages for an alleged
fraudulent representation in writing, made by the de-
fcndant as the pecuniary responsibility Of Gates,
to enable him to obtain credit tappeared that Gates
resided in keeseville n. Y.,where he doing bust
ness The plaintiffs had sold him goods, and on
his applying for more asked references whcreupon
Gates forwarded general letter OF recommendation
from the defendant stating in effect that he had known
Gates for number OF years, and believed him safe
be trusted The plaintiffs subsequently sold Gates
goods TO the amount OF several hundred dollars which
were never paid for, Gates having failed soon after
The plaintiffs claimed that the goods had been oh,
tanned the faith OF defendants recommendation and
tina, it false within defendants knowledge. For
the defence it claimed that the goods not de-
vered the faith of the representation, and that the
representation was made by the defendant in good faith
hebeeying it TO De During the trial certain dep
ositions taken by magistrate i'll Alabama were offer
ed by the Plaintiffs and objected to. The court ruled
that when dispositions taken in foreign State are Of
iered, it must be shown that the authority taking them,
has power under the laws of such State to take deposit
tons to be used in heir courts Butupon examination
Of the statute OF Alabama, the court decided that JUS
tee OF the peace in that State has authority to take such
testimony and accordingly admitted the depostons.-
Verdict Tor defendant.
Mack 4 WIRES and PLArT PECK for plaintiffs
a. PECK \ LEAvEHwoRTH for defendant.
d. D. Il J. p. HOWARD BENANiN LrAvEys-
This was an action of assumpst upon promise by
defendant 10 pay certain notes given by one Butler Of
Und-rhll to the plaintiffs while proprctors of the
Howard House in New York. The consideration Of
the promise stated in different counts TO be the dis
charge OF Butler from debt by the plaintiffs and the
giving up OF the note by plaintiffs TO the defendant
For the defendant was objected that this undertaking
not being in writing void by the statute OF frauds.
he court held that being upon an independent consid
GRAFTON, II an original undertaking and not within
the statute. The defendant subsequently obtained q
continuance.
sMALLrv & PnrLrs for plaintiffs
PLAT & PECK Tor defendant.
WIN. r. TCrPrR SAMUEL X IsrsM-This was
an action on alleged false warranty OF horse sold
by defendant 10 plaintiff for $50, and claned to have
been ullsound. The defence was that the horse was
not warranted and perfectly sound at the time OF
the sale. About seventy witnesses examined,
and the cause occupied the Court until the evening of
the 9th. Daring the trial one of the plaintiffs Wit
enquircd of the part OF the defen liant
whether he had not given different relation OF GER
tain facts TO another individual, naming him The
witness having denied this the defendants counsel sub
sequenty called the individual mentioned for the pur
pose OF proving the statement denied by the witness.
On objection, the Court ruled, that as the attention OF
the witness sought be impeachcd had not been cal
led to the time and place, of making the statement de-
MED as well as to the person to whom il was made
evidence to contradict him in that particular
ppmissble and added tina, this rule was sanctioned
by the recent English decisions and would BE- adopted
III this circuit. Verdict for the defendant.
kAsSoN X BUCKLEY Il SKATER for plant Fl.
a PECK. SNALIEY & PHELPS for defendant.
5. ;. SMITH JYo kEELER--This was an action
oi assumpst to recover balance claimed to be due up
on contract To clear land. The case had been tried
before, and the defendant had Obtained new trial
the last term of the Supreme Court. The defence
that the work was improperly done and that the
tract was made by the paintiiijontIy with one Sam
smith who should have beenladc party 10 the suit
Verdict for plaintiff Tor balance claimed
CARPESTER and SMALIEY SPTELPs for plaintiff
VAN SICKLEN X NJ ,ECK WyRyS for defendant