The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1921-05-10
WRIT OF ERROR
IN EMERSON CASE
Municipal Court Directed by
Supreme Court to
Send Up Record
HEARING AT NEXT
OCTOBER TERM

Unexpected Move in Ejectment Suit of III.
l.. Emerson Against Great Atlantic &
Pacific Tea Co.-Interesting Develop
ment in Local Case.
An unexpected move in the ejectment
litigation between Harry l.. Emerson and
the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
gives d new status to that case in which
there is much local interest.
The new move is the issuance by Chief
Judge John H. Watson of the Vermont
supreme court of a writ of error directed
to Judge Frank d. Z. Stowe of the Brat
tIeboro municipal court commanding him
to send to. the supreme court the record
and proceedings in the case and to have
them with the clerk of the court in
Montpelier on or before Oct t, 1921,
that they may be inspected and that the
supreme court may cause to be done to
correct the alleged error whatever may
be necessary.
This puts the case over to the regular
October term at Montpelier, when the
supreme court win review the entire case.
The active counsel in the case are .. i.
Hughes and VI. Z. Maurice for Nh En-
erson and ii. q. Barber for the Tea Co.
The case came up in the supreme court
inns morning anu ATTORNEY I1NRnES was
present to move that the Tea Cos eXcep-
tiOns to Judge Stoves findings be dis
missed. but Attorney Barber moved that
they be dismissed and stated for the ben
eft of Mr.. Hughes that the court had is
sued a writ Of error. Mr.. Hughes made
an oral motion that the writ of error
be dismissed, but the court declined to
entertain it. The court also declined to
entertain q motion of Mr.. Hughes that
the Tea Co. be required to give addi-
tional recognizance.
The public is familiar with the main
facts in the case. which are that Mr..
Emerson brought an ejectment suit in
the municipal court, claiming that the
Tea co. failed to give him notice of its
intention TO renew its lease as provided
in the contract between the two parties.
Several questions were involved. one of
/ which was the claim by the Tea Co. that
/ where title 10 real estate is involved,
which the Tea Co. claimed was involved
! in this ease as shown by the record. the
municipal court is without jurisdiction
TO try the case
/ Judge Stowe decided in favor of Mr.
/ Emerson and the Tea Co. appealed to
I the supreme court.
( Mr. Barber for the Tea Co fled with
/ the supreme court yesterday an assign
ment Of errors upon which he would rely
/ in the prosecution of the writ of error.
/ One was that the municipal court was
:
/ ter of the cause of action. in that title
IF land was involved. and that he erred
/ in taking jurisdiction. also erred in dis
missing the motion of the Tea Co. to
/ dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction.
/ Other errors also were alleged, one of
which was that the municipal court erred
/ in its findings of fact on certain oral
evidence.
! The Tea Co. asked that the municipal
court Judgment be reversed and that the
municipal court be directed to enter
/ Judgment that the Tea Co. was in right
! full possession and occupancy of the prem
( Uses. which are the store now occupied
/ by the company in Mr.. Emerson's build
I ing on Elliot street. also that the Tea
/ Co. be allowed to recover its costs.
! Judge Watson theTeupOn issued a writ
/ of error. which was served on Mr.. Emer-
son last night by Deputy Sheriff Fred
/ Cressy. citing him TO appear before the
! supreme court Oct. to show cause why
/ the Judgment against the Tea Co. should
not be corrected The writ. by direc
4 tion of Judge Watson, acts as a supersid-
oas over an execution issued upon the
/ Judgment of the municipal court from the
/ date of the service of the writ.