Fisher v. Tupper
This text of 50 A. 1106 (Fisher v. Tupper) 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
Neither the ad damnum in the writ, nor the sum demanded by the declaration, nor the specification presented by the plaintiff, exceeded twenty dollars; and the case was «not appealable unless the plaintiff offered an exhibit exceeding that amount. V. S. 1298. It is clear that the exhibit here intended is a writing offered as the basis of recovery. Church v. Vanduzee, 4 Vt. 195; Weston v. Marsh, 12 Vt. 420; Warren v. Newfane, 25 Vt. 250; Connecticut etc. R. R. Co. v. Bates, 32 Vt. 420; Cole v. Goodell, 39 Vt. 400; Williams v. Mason, 45 Vt. 372; Concord v. National Bank, 51 Vt. 144; Perry v. Gay, 52 Vt. 615. The plaintiff offered no writing other than his specification. So no statement of a claim [353]*353exceeding twenty dollars was presented in any of the ways specified in the statute, and further inquiry as to the petitioner’s position is unnecessary.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
50 A. 1106, 73 Vt. 352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fisher-v-tupper-vt-1901.