The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1884-03-12
Orange County Supreme Court.

Orange county supreme court assembled
Tuesday morning, March 4th. Present. Chief
Judge Royce and Judges Ross Powers, and
Taft. After prayer by Rev. Harvey Webster,
pastor of the Methodist church, the docket was
called and of the twenty -four cases, it was
found that only eight were to be heard. OF
the others, four were already with the court
for decision, having been heard at former
terms, one was continued generally, one had
been settled, four were continued to the gen.
eral term, in four the exceptions were with
drawn and in two the judgment was affirmed
Two new entries were made, one the case Of
Ira NJ. Hill Us. Martin c. Rowell, petition for
a new trial, which was continued to the general
term, the case of Martin G Rowel Us Ira NJ
Hill, on exception, being already continued to
that term; also the divorce case of Rosaia A.
Hartman as. Frederick II. Hartman, brought
forward from March !, 1868, docket and at this
term continued to Caledonia county supreme
court in May. The court was in session but
two days, announcing its decisions Wednesday
evening, at Chief Judge Royce's room in the
hotel, and leaving on the stage Thursday morn
ing The first case heard was that of G. w.
Farr & Company Us. W B. Carpenter, appellant,
exceptions by defendant to judgment of county
court on referees report. The judgment of
county court was affirmed. A. Nj. Dickey for
for plaintiff and r NJ. Harvey for defendant.
The next case was Horace Wiley, administra-
tor of Jacob B. Chamberlin Us. William Hun
| ter. This came up on exception by defendant
to referees report in the celebrated water case,
| involving damages to house and mill site,
whose hearing year ago in Topsham town
| hall occupied some thirty days The court re-
served its decision. R NJ. Harvey for the
plaintiff, j. X Darling and John H. Watson
| for defendant. William A. Ashley ct TX as.
| BEN amn +. Hyde was an action indebitatus
assumpst, in which the defendent was sum-
moned to answer to William Ashley and Ar
minda w. Ashley, wife of said William A.
Without setting up the wife as the meritorious
cause of action TO this declaration, the defendant
| filed general demurrer, which was overrued
at December term, 1882, to which the defendant
excepted, which exceptions were allowed and
| ordered to lie pending the trial Of the case on
its merits. On June l, 1888, the trial occurred,
resulting in verdict for the plaintiff to recover
| $50 80 Exceptions were taken at the trial,
| also, and on both bills of exceptions the case
| passed to supreme court. Without giving an
opinion on the exception taken at the trial, the
court, by Judge Powers, decided that the de-
| murrer ought to have been sustained by the
| county court hence adjudged the declaration
insufficient, ordered the Judgment of the county
| court to be reversed and the cause remanded,
with leave to plaintiff to apply for amendment.
S. c. Shurtleff appeared for plaintiff and
George l.. Stowe for the defendant.
In H. Lille, by guardian, C.. R. Granger
| u.s. Estate of f. Lille, n. l. BOyden, admins
traitor, and F. A. Moses, which was petition
| to enter an appeal from the probate court, the
supreme court sustained the judgment OF the
county court allowing the appeal to be entered.
J. D. Denison for petitioner and n L. Boyden
for petitionee. Coriss Way Us. Hilas Grow,
appellant, which came up on exception by de-
PENDANT to Judgment of county court sustaining
referees report, was heard and retained for
further consideration. j, X, Darling for plain
tiff, r. M Harvey and John I'll. Watson for
| defendant.
In Henry H Morse Us John L. Morse. the
plaintiff excepted to the county courts judg
ment for the smaller sum reported by the ref
| cree and prevailed on his exceptions, the su-
preme court ordering Judgment for the larger
sum reported. r, NJ. Harvey for plaintiff, j.
| P. Cameron for defendant
In George w. Merrill, administrator of S. III.
Merrill Us. George w. Wood, which arose on
defendants exceptions to referees report, the
judgment OF county court was affirmed. John
ii. Watson and J. X. Darling for the plaintiff,
A. NJ. Dickey for defendant
The case OF Daniel and George Tarbell u.s.
| William j. Tarbell was an appeal In chancery
by the orators from Chancellor Rowells decree
Diminishing the bill of injunction brought by
orators to restrain defendant from prosecuting
at law his false warrant suit against them, and
praying that the deed might be reformed.
This is one link OF an amending chain Of suits
pertaining to a six-foot strip of land between
Aaron n Kings and William j. Tarbelps
blocks of buildings at South Royalton King
and Tarbell for several years contested for the
possession of this six-foot strip, both at law and
in equity but William j. Tarbell, finally be-
coming worsted in an ejectment suit, has turned
to his grantors for satisfaction; to the bill in
equity, the defendant presented plea in abate-
ment that the matter alleged therein had al
ready been decided in a chancery suit between
the same parties and their privies. To this
plea was demurrer, and briefs having been
presented and heard, the court held the case
for further consideration. Lamb and Tarbel
and j. J. Wilson for the orators, Hunton and
Stickney for the defendant.-Free Press.