Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1867-09-27
windham County Court.

Erasmus Plhnpion 10y T.. A. Plimpton,
Ex'r. VS.. Somerset-This was an action
on the case to recover damages for injuries
sustained by Erasmus Plimplon in his life
time, by reason of the insufiisiency of
highway in the town of Somerset, on the
2Sth day of August, 1854.
This action was first tried at the Sep
TENDER Term, 1856, and the jury returned
verdict for the defendants.
The plaintiff then took his reriew and
the cause was referred to commissioners
in conformity with the law OF 1856 enti-
tied /" An act providing for the reference
of actions in the County Court" and in
July, 1857, the cause was heard before
Harmon Garfield, John S. Pettibone and
Joseph Dodge, commissioners who made a
report in favor of the plaintiff.
The defendants carried the case to the
Supreme Court on exceptions; and it was
heard at the February term, 1859. AT
this hearing the judges were divided in
opinion, and the case was re-argued at a
Special Term of the Supreme Court be-
fore full board of judges in November
following. 1t was then held that the act
of the legislature above referred to, was
unconstitutional, and hence, all proceed
ings before the commissioners were void
and the cause was remanded to the County
Court for a new trial. The cause was
tried at the September term 1868; at the
September term 1864, and at the April
term 1865, in all of which, the jury failed
TO agree. At the present term it was
again put on trial and application was
made to the court by defendants counsel
to send the jury to examine the locality
where the accident occurred. This appli-
cation was resisted by plaintiff counsel on
the ground that the present condition of
the highway was very different from what
il was in 1854, and also because on preyi-
GUS trials, improper influences were thrown
about the jury during the trip. The court
granted the application for the defendants,
and directed the sheriff in charge of the
jury to permit one counsel from each side
to accompany him, and to allow no other
person to hold any communication what
ever with the panel.
The plaintiff was represented by Charles
Z. Arnold and the defendants by Z. l..
Waterman, and the whole party in charge
of sheriff Phelps of Grafton, after having
examined the premises in Somerset, re-
turned to Newfane and the trial COM
menced on Friday the 18th inst.
/, was claimed by the plaintiff who in
,roduced evidence tending to show tina
Mr.. PKmton on the 2Sth of August, 1854
was driving over a highway in Somerset
down the Bartlett hill. and when near th
foot of said hill the fore wheels OF hi
wagon struck dead against water ba
with such force that the king bolt wa
thrown out the wagon making a complete
somersault. Mr.. Plimpton was thrown gu
receiving severe blow on the head
smashing his nose, and also heavy blow
upon his stomach which caused dangerou
internal injuries. 1t appeared from tn
testimony of physicians and others tina
Mr.. Plimpton never recovered from thes'
injuries. but was in feeble health ever at
forwards; as compared with his healtl
before the accident and finally died II
June, 1866, from diseases resulting fron
injuries received at tie time OF the accl
dent.
The plaintiff further claimed that tn
/. water bar at which the accident occurre
was out of repair, being washed ont o
the upper side and the upper slope hig
and abrupt.
The defendants claimed that Mr.. PlimE
ton was not in the exercise of ordinar
care inasmuch as be was driving with uf
usual speed with wagon old and unsafe
and that the king bolt was too short. The
also claimed that the road was in good al
sufficient repair, all of which the plaln'i
denied. The case was given to the Jul
8 at o'clock, p. NJ, on Wednesday, II
: 18th inst, who after twenty-seven hou
elaboration returned verdict for defe
It dant$. Exceptions by plaintiff
Il II. f. Stoughton, H. II. Wheeler, &.
n Davenport and C. E. Arnold for plaintiff
!. Field & Tyler, Flagg IL Waterman al
:. A. Stoddard for defendants.
80 Silas NJ. Waite VS.. James +. Burrov
- This was an action Of assumpsit. L
:, plaintiff as administrator of the estate
70 f. B. Thompson, now deceased, sought
% recover S2250, which he claimed the {
m PENDANT owed the estate. The defendi
=. allowed that he once owed the wife OF
u deceased $500 in notes, and $500
m personal property which he had OF b
= and denied all Indebtedness TO the pla
IN, "'''
l.. In