National opinion. [volume] (Bradford, Vt.) 1865-1874, 1870-03-18

OAoeOAf Ohh'cy ANA NAt'
johnson VS.. Sargent. Motion to
set aside the verdict for the plf., on
account of the misconduct of one of
the jurors. The judgm't of Co. court
refusing to set aside the verdict re.
versed and cause remanded. He
bards for diff, White g. DennisOn
for plf.
Champney VS.. Estate Of Champ
ney, and Stevens claimant.-COn-
tinued. Leslie & Rogers & Hebards
for plf's., Dickey s. Gambell for
Claimant.
William p. Garfield VS.. Melwell
NJ. Avery.-It appeared in this case
that the Judgment of the Co. court
was net complete ard it was treated
as misentry here. that the case
might go back to the Co. court to
have Judgment perfected. This was
an action of replevin for the recove
ry of horse. The Judgment of the
Co. court was pro lorna that the
defendant have judgment, simply,
without ordering the property to be
returned. Defendant claimed that
if he finally obtained afiirmance of
this judgment, it was of no value to
him, and that 1t was a mistake of
the Co. court. Farnham for plf,
Clarke and Martin for diff.
Harvey VS.. Stevens.-Continued.
Suit about Moving Machine. Liv-
: ingstone & Clark for plf., Mardin,
and Dickcy & Gambcll for diff.
Steele vs.. Doten.-A school Dis
trict case. With the Court. Perrin
) for plf, Dcnnison x Boydcn fol
def.
Allen VS.. Bliss-Bliss VS.. Allen
Allen vs.. Bliss came here on excep
tons taken by def. to the decision
2 of Co. court, on a motion to set aside
the verdict which was obtained last
: term. Bliss rs. Allen. is 4 petition
to this court for new trial on the
ground Of surprise at some of The
testimony in the case when tried il
ID ecember. Testimony was takci
on both sides and the case was evi
3, IDENTIFY ready for trial but the min
y utes of the testimony at the time o
II the trial in Co. court could not b,
II had as the shorthand reporter ha'
l. neglected to write them out. Con
J tinued. Farnham, and Dickey s
Gambell for Allen, Ornsby & Clarl
for Bliss.
IL Badger VS.. Woodward ct. al
~ This was an action for false inpris
" onmcnt brought by the plf. agains
- the Justice, constable and privat
: prosecutor for arresting and detalr
~ ing him on IA charge of drunkenness
IL in August, 1868. The defendant
IL pleaded the facts of the intoyicatio
X legal complaint, warrant and arres
IL in justification. Plaintiff replied t
the plea that the justice was not dl
~ elected, that private prosccu
rs tor has no right to enter complaint
At under the Liquor Law, and that I'll
- recognizancc en- the warrant was il
re formal. To this replication the dc
to PENDANTS demurrcd. and Il hearin
IN was bad before the Co. court, al
1t. iu( rmcnt rendered for the defcn,
he ants sustaining the demurrer. I
at this decision the plaintiff took e,
ceptions. Judgment Tor detendan
affirmed and execution issued in e
IT, vor of defendants. Ditkey Il GaI
bell for plf., Farnham for dft's.
-. Camp VS.. Page. Judgment f
.ts defendant affirmed. Shurtlef +
plf, Heath for diff.
Burnham VS.. Town of Chelsea.
ot SHIT to recover II town bounty.
nd Judgment of Co. court for plf. II
-, act of 1862 authorized towns to vC
bOunties to Volunteers. In 1863 {
!. town of Chelsea voted to pay
~, bounty to drafted men. The pla
Ir tiff soon after was drafted and p
am cured a substitute. The princil
question in the case is whether t
In act of 1860 authorized towns to "
the bounties to drafted men. Case
- with the Court. Dickey & Gamb
for plf., Hebards for diff.
mn State VS.. Mitchcll.--JudgmcDt
lar. frmed. States Atty for State,
md b. Hebard for respondent.
McLanc, Admin VS.. JohnsOns
for Petition of the Administrator
,co. Jesse Johnson's Estate to set asl
q deed from tho deceased to defer
L. ants made In ls4l, Of ,nc.third
,,ds their home farm, OH the ground t
it was q deed in trust. 'Nbe dc
claim that the trade was bona n
chat t1,a,, hovo nail tho conRidC