Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1894-02-15
SUPREME COURT ADJOURNED. =



BE Rendered on March 1.
MONTPELIER. Feb. In the case of Sim
son Swordferger ct ux, VS.. Amos ID. Hop
kins the arguments We're commenced yester
day afternoon and finished this forenoon.
It comes from Caledonia county and is an
action of trcspass quare clausum and was
brought to settle the title to a piece of land
in Hardwick In the court below the plain
tiff recovered one cent damages and costs.
The exceptions were taken by the defend
ant j. Z. Lamson for the plaintiff and
Bates q May for the defendant.
Truman r. Stiles VS.. Warren Estabroolis
is also an action of trespass quare clausum
from Caledonia county. Plaintiff and de-
PENDANT own adjoining premises in the vii
lage of st. Johnsbury and the controversy
relates to the division line between them.
In the court below plaintiff obtained "A spe
cial verdict in his favor and 81 damages.
Exceptions by defendant. The case was
heard this afternoon. Harry Blodgett and
w. z. Stafford for plaintiff and Alex Dun
net for the defendant
The next case for trial is NJ. ". Tatro.
apt, vs.. William :. Baiey--a Caledonia
county case. As there are now but two or
three cases lett for hearing an adjournment
of the court will soon be reached.
MONTPELIER, Feb. S,--The arguments in
NJ NJ. Tatro, appellant, vs.. William :.
Bailey, which were commenced yesterday
afternoon. were finished this forenoon. 1t
is an action in general assumpsit to recover
back the service fee of n stallion, plaintiff
| claiming that in case his mare did not prove
with foal the service fee was to be refunded
On the other hand defendant claims that
| there was to be return privilege the COM
! ing season as advertised in his catalogue.
! This case is from Caledonia county. ". I.
Stafford for plaintiff and 3. z. Billiard and
j. T. Lanson for defendant.
I George B. Davis. admir-. vs.. George f..
Eastman. exr.. is bill in chancery from
. Caledonia county and was heard on the do
PENDANTS demurrer TO the bill. The trouble
arose in the settlement Of viii made lay
one Mary Flint. of which defendant is exec
utor. 1t was heard this forenoon. Bates
, and May for orator. H. C. Idle and VI
! Montgomery for defendant.
The three cases of stone 4 WELLINGTON vs.
Mile l.. Rohie. appellent: same rs. Charles
d. White, appellent same ". David II
Wilson We're heard together and the argu-
ments were finished this afternoon. They
all come from Caledonia county and the to-
tai amount involved in about 800 The
main question il whether the agent of the
plaintiff in the sale Of nursery stock made
misrepresentation sufficient to void the con.
tracts. The question rs to whether nursery
stock is personal property or real estate is
also involved. Alex Dunnett for plaintiff
and Bates and May for defendant
Gary w Houston vs. Brush & Curtis is
now on trial and is the last cas-, from Gale
donna county to be heard. This is an ac-
ton for negligence. Defendants had in
/ a c1'ay mir in, lN,Ir, or1
manufacturing shed in HardNick. Pain
tiff was at the time of the accident iii q,les-
ton az work for the defendants AZ their
Hardwick shed, as granite finhl. Flain-
tih's evidence tended to show that he was in
the act Of letting down stone upon which
he was about to start to work, when one of
the wheels Of the tackle block at the head
of the mast of the derrick came out and
struck him on the head which caused the
injury complained of. Defendants say that
the accident was of such an extraordinary
and unnatural character that plaintiff ought
not 10 recover, as he SHOWS no Affirmative
proof of negligence. Plaintiff recovered a
verdict OF S229 damages and costs in county
court. Bates and May and Perley and Tay-
lor for the plaintiff and j. L, hanson for
the defendants.
| MONTPELIER, Feb 9.---Ihe arguments in
| the CoSp of Gary w Houston bruSh &
Cnr,is which ware haoun ,estordov ofto,.
noon were finished tbis foreman
The Two cases Of Woodhurv Granite co,,,.
pany VS.. Milikin q Gibson and Millikn 4.
Gibson VS.. Woodbury. Granite company are
from Wssbipctor comfy and arc now, ho;no
hoard +oootbnr Plo;rtify i'm tho CONT hoIo,e
rocoyorod so1o4 n in an action Of oo,,aro1
oss,n,n.it orJ tho lo+to, ;c n.t;tian fo,. ~
new trial The plaintiffs MiIlikin g. Gin
con eued m rocover for tbo nrica Of o,.,rit,