Commercial Jewelry Co. v. Dente
This text of 75 A. 962 (Commercial Jewelry Co. v. Dente) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Vermont primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This case was'brought here by the defendant. When it was reached, he was not ready, and at his request, it was left with the Court, under an order granting leave to the ex-ceptant to file the printed case and his brief within a time specified, and providing that judgment should be affirmed in case he failed to comply with the order. He did not comply.
There is reason to believe that the real force and effect of such an order as was made in this case are not fully appreciated by the members of the bar. We take this opportunity, therefore, to make the matter plain. Orders of this bind are of the nature of special rules of Court, which when made pursuant to statute have all the force of law. Taft v. Taft, 82 Vt. 64, 71 Atl. 831. They are made to expedite proceedings, and should [351]*351be respected by the bar and enforced by the court. Otherwise practice becomes confused and unsatisfactory. That the order in question was within the power of the court is well established. Pillger v. Strassman, 119 Cal. 691, 52 Pac. 40; Sutton v. Jones, 9 Colo. App. 36, 47 Pac. 400; Myers v. Jeffersonville, 144 Ind. 567, 40 N. E. 796; Brashears v. Ventus, (Ky.) 43 S. W. 405; Plymouth Clo. Ho. v. Seymour, 74 Minn. 425, 77 N. W. 239.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
75 A. 962, 83 Vt. 350, 1910 Vt. LEXIS 200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commercial-jewelry-co-v-dente-vt-1910.