Fisher v. Tupper

50 A. 1106, 73 Vt. 352
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided November 29, 1901·Published

Opinion

Munson, J.

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

Fisher v. Tupper, 50 A. 1106, 73 Vt. 352 (Vt. 1901).

50 A. 1106 (Fisher v. Tupper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Church v. Vanduzee
4 Vt. 195 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1831)
Town of Weston v. Marsh
12 Vt. 420 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1840)
Warren v. Town of Newfane
25 Vt. 250 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1853)
Connecticut & Passumpsic Rivers Railroad v. Bates
32 Vt. 420 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1859)
Cole v. Goodall
39 Vt. 400 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1867)
Williams v. Mason
45 Vt. 372 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1873)
Town of Concord v. National Bank
51 Vt. 144 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1878)
Perry v. Gay, Kimball & Gay
52 Vt. 615 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1880)