Case Name: ANDREW against CONRO
Court: Vermont Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Vermont
Decision Date: 1816
Citations: 1 Brayt. 72
Docket Number: No. 4
Parties: ANDREW against CONRO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Brayton
Volume: 1
Pages: 72–73

Head Matter:
No. 4.
ANDREW against CONRO.
Franklin,
1816.
IT appeared that the declaration complained of an assault and battery on personal property; there was a plea of not guilty, to the assault and battery, and issue closed to the Jury thereon; there was a farther plea in bar, justifying the trespass upon the property, to which there was a replication of de inju-ra, &c. concluded to the country, to this there' was a special demurrer and joinder.
The record shewed no trial of the issue of fact and no other judgment,except in these words: “Damages $53; Cost $37,58; Agreed to.” A plea in abatement to the writ óf error,- alledg» itíg that there was no judgment. Replication : There was a judgment and execution for the said sum of $53 damages, $37,58 costs. Demurrer.

Opinion:
The Court decided. There was error in the record and judgment of the County Court, and that the same be set aside,&c. and the cause continued for this Court to render such judgment ás the County Court ought to have rendered.