The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1919-05-07
MIMMS WINS
HIS 81 SUIT
Supreme Court Orders Au-
ditor Benjamin Gates to
Pay Him
WAS FOR SERVICES
AS STENOGRAPHER
The Auditor Claimed That
Mimms Was Away from
Duties a Short Time

Ono of the most interesting decisions
| that has been handed down i'll Vermont
supreme court in long time was given
Tuesday afternoon IN the washington
county case of John H. Mimms vs.. BEN
1 iamn Gates. The sum involved amounts
| only to 50 but the defendant claimed
the policy was great. However, the
court decided that the policy was wrong
and directed Gates to pay Milnms the
81 on demand.
| MIR. Mimms was a court reporter IN
| Chittenden county over year ago he
presiding Judge approved his statement
| for work in the term of court from
which the suit resulted but the state
auditor refused to honor the whole ac-
| count and reduced it to 81, which had
TO do with Mr.. Mimms being away from
| the court day and another stenograPh-
err being employed. Mr.. Mimms brought
mandamus proceeding, asking the SUI
preme court to direct the auditor to pay
| him the 81. setting forth the reasons
! why he claimed il was due him. The
defense did not deny the amount but
claimed it was matter of policy that
| the allowance Of the 81 was denied. The
1 case WAS dIAu6h dbh tHt NSN'9tVf ''tNS
handed down yesterday afternoon.
The following entry was given to the
| clerk: Judgment that mandamIs be IS
sued directed to said Benjamin Gates,
commanding him to allow the petitioner
his account as the same was allowed by
the presiding Judge Of Chittenden county
fcourt and that he issue his order TO the
state treasurer for the sum OF 81, to be
paid on demand
Other decisions that were handed down
without opinion being read were: Or.
leans county, Ward Prouty and Edith
prouty VS.. T. G. Blanchard, judgment
vacated, petition granted and cause re.
manded for new trial; Caledonia coun
ty, Ada NJ. Bennett vs. George X. Ben
nett ct ux, decree reversed, cause re.
manded with mandate to be filed later;
Essex county, William II. Riggie VS..
Grand Trunk railway, judgment re-
yersed; Judgment for the defendant with
costs
In the Washington county case of H.
T. slsyton W. u. a. Drown an opinion
was read which reversed the judgment
Of the lower court and remanded the
cause. In the lower court the plaintiff
received verdict Of 1856, This case
resulted from the Vaughan bankruptcy
proceedings.
A lengthy opinion was read IN the
Orange county case Of John Gilman VS.
the Central Vermont railway in which
Judgment was reversed and Judgment
given for the defendant TO recover his
costs. This case resulted from an auto
mobile accident. the plaintiff in the low
err court obtaining Judgment Of S366a2
The court held that the defendant
showed reasonable amount Of care
about the movement Of its trains, that
the plaintiff did not use reasonable
amount OF care in approaching the grade
crossing. although the train was stand
ing on the crossing. The question Of the
right Of driver of an automobile TO
recover damages when operating an un-
licensed ear, as the one mentioned was
| shown TO be that is a transfer had been
made and the fye-day period had ex-
piredl was discussed at considerable eX-
tent in the opinion.