Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1875-03-05
Supreme Court.
FEBRUARY TERM, 1875.


The following report we copy from
the Brattleboro Phoenix
Franklin Doolittle vs. F. A. Nash.
At the April term of the county court
judgment was rendered for the defend
ant on demurrer. The supreme court
reversed this decision and remsnded the
case to the county court.
John M. Patch IL wife VS.. Phoenix
ms. Co. In this case the judgment of
the county court was affirmed. The In
surance Co. issued a paid up policy, and
upon the margin of said policy was a
note setting forth that the policy was a
conditional one, or that the interest up
on certain notes which had been given
by the assured must de paid when it ac-
crued. 1t appeared upon the trial of
the cause in the county court that this in
terest had not been paid. The court held
that this marginal note was part of the
contract, and inasmuch as it had not been
complied with, Judgment was rendered
for the defendant.
VIM. j. Babcock & wife vs. Guilford.
This case involved the question as to
the legality Of a notice given by the
plaintiff to the selectmen Of Guilford in
regard to the place in said town where
Mrs. Babcock was accidentally injured.
The court held that statute requiring
written notice to the selectmen must be
complied with, and in such manner
that the authorities of town can clear
ly ascertain the place where the acci-
dent occurred, and that notice given
by the husband alone would be sufficient
if the notice was broad enough to cover
damages claimed by both husband and
wife. In this case the notice mentioned
the name of the highway without speci.
flying any particular place in said high
way, and was therefore held insufficient.
The judgment of the county court was
affirmed.
Lucius l.. Wiley VS.. First National
Bank of Brattleboro. April term 1874
Judgment for plf. S3252.91. j. D.
Whitney VS.. same Sept. term, 1874
Judgment for plR for S552736. There
were exceptions taken in both of these
cases to the ruling of the county cour
upon which the judgments were based
The question raised was whether the
United States law under which Nationa
banks we're established authorized thu
officers of bank to receive special de
posts. The court have decided that tn,
officers of bank have no authority t
receive special deposits; and that if |
cashier receive such deposits with tn
knowledge of the president and directors
it does not bind the bank. The cour
intimated that there was an undertaken,
to keep such deposits with proper de
gree of care, but that it was not con
tract on the part of the bank.
Geo. Newman, Treas, vs.. Sias NJ
Waite.-This was petition on the par
of defendant asking the court to recall
its Judgment and remand the cause t
the county court with an order that tha
court should reverse the Judgment an
allow the defendant to file a plea to tie:
the constitutionality of our statute whic
imposes penalty upon bank officers fc
refusing to return bank stock for Ii
purposes of taxation. The court sal
that the petition in substance was for
new trial, but that the judgment of Ii
court was not such one as they felt di
posed to recall or reverse, even if tt
court had power to do so. The object
the petition was to raise a question whic
would allow the United States court
pass upon the constitutionality of ii
statute in question. The petition wi
dismissed with costs.
Chas n Davenport, Admr. VS.. Nor
Eastern Mutual Life Association.
this case the court held that suit ca
not be maintained against an insuran
company by the administrator of Il
husbands estate when the policy issu,
by the company specifies that it is to
paid to the wife of the assured and
heirs.
Hiram Circuit VS.. Ralph E. Hosfor
This case was heard by the court
the Feb. term, 1872, and has been in t
hands Of the court since that time. T
decision reverses the decree according