Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1848-03-10

This was an action Of trespass gsrre olausaR, and
turned upon question OF title. Tho facts were
agreed upon.
The premises in question were conveyed by ANA
ziah Richmond to Warren Richmond, BY deed dated
Feb n, 1891. Amer the granting clause and des-
crption Of the land, there Is the following exception
reservation: Meaning TO convey one hall Of the
above described land, with one half Of the buildings
standing on the premises and the other half not to
come into possession Of Il, till afcr my decease,
II Is meant to convey the whole Of The above des.
cribed land amer the death Of Amaziah Richmond
and Sarah Richmond Warren Richmonds title
has passed to the Plaintiff and the Defendant enter
ed under Sarah Richmond AmaziAh being dead.
IL further appeared that Amaziah Rchmonds inte-
rest was in his life time attached by the Bellows
Falls Bank, and judgment obtained against him.
On execution thereon, aff his death but within five
months from judgment, his interest was set of on
execution to the Bank. The question is, had Sarah
Richmond title OF right Of entry.
Judgment for Plaintiff below and exceptions.
Argument for Plaintiff by W. c. Bradley and c.
]. Walker; for Defendant, Asa Keyes.
The Court retained this case
Holden 70. iSteca and Afrood
This was an action for false imprisonment. The
Defendants pleaded separately, and set up in de-
fence a judgment against Holden, upon which an
execution issued, and Plaintiff was imprisoned.
Steen was the justice who rendered the judgment,
and Atwood the Plaintiff therein. Replication Of
nd fie record. The record showed first n confnn-
Ance after jury trial, in which the jury did not
agree, to Saturday morning, without naming hour
place; second, further adjournment, a, the re-
quest Of Plaintiff, without naming time or place
third, consent by the parties to have hearing
a day fixed, At which time Holden, the then De-
PENDANT, was dcfaulied. Judgment for Defendants
In the Cour below, and exceptions
IL was commended for the Plaintiff that the iregu-
lArites In the proceedings Of the justice operated
q dtcontinuance Of the action, and the record was
no Justification to the Defendants And for the De-
PENDANTS that whatever might be the irregularities,
the judgment being of q court Of record could not
thus impcached collaterally, as the record showed
Jurisdiction Of the parties and subject matter, and
any error in the proceedings could only be reached
by proceeding acting directly upon the Judgment.
For Plaintiff, y. kirkland and A. Reyes; for De-
fendanf, c. l. Walker.
REDTIEID, J.-The Judgment was not rod, as il
shows Jurisdiction, and whatever might have beea
the result Of an oifa guyr to set aside the iudg-
good protection TO those acting underif Judgment
" County Court affirmed.
State rs. Piynpsoa & Higgins.
Indictment for selling liquor without a license
verdict guilty, and motion in arrest, which
ruled, and exceptions taken. The defect relied up
in the filing Of the Indictment by the clerk
required by the statute The word exhibited"
wns not used.
For State, States Attorney, T. KirkiAndi for Re
spondents, W. c. Bradley.
BESSrTr, Filling sufficient Judgment below
affirmed
Kyes & WIk II. Wood, Grant & Go.
This was 4 bill in chancery. The material facts
appearing in the case. were that in 1883 John Black
executed to SieArns a Houghion Of New York city
several large notes payable at different times secur-
ed BY mortgage. These notes were in trust for Mn
Reyes Of the Plaintiffs which trust did not ap
pear either upon the notes or mortgage In 1872
Wood, Grant Co. having incurred liabilities foE
Houshion Shaler, they passed to them as collat-
eral security certificate Of deposit on Southern
Bank for $4,000. And afterwards, NJ the solicita.
ton Of S,cans A. Houghion lone Of the firm Of II
& 81. they exchanged said certificate for two Of
Blacks notes Of $500 each, neither Of which were
then due; and this without notice Of the trust That
W, G. Co were at the tine informed by Hough-
ton that the notes were secured by mortgage, and
were assured they should have the benefit Of IL in
collecting their notes. W. q. & Co. subsequently
bad TO pay large sums for IL & s. on account Of the
liabilities incurred As above They therefore brot
their bin Of foreclosure upon The mortgage thu,
orally assigned TO them TO the notes, before
the Chancellor for this District The present bill
prays that they might be enjoined from proceeding
further with the foreclosure and be decreed to give
mp the notes in question. Bill dismissed pr0 svna
by the Chancellor and appeal taken
bor Plaintiffs, A Keyes and VIM. C. Bradley
for Defendants, G. b Kellogg and C. l. Walker
The Court retained this case