Fullington v. Goodwin

Supreme Court of Vermont

Fullington v. Goodwin

57 Vt. 641

DecidedAugust 15, 1885

StatusPublished

This text of 57 Vt. 641 (Fullington v. Goodwin) 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.

Bluebook

Fullington v. Goodwin, 57 Vt. 641 (Vt. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Veazey, J.

The portion of the former rail fence that was taken away by the defendant, was not when so taken, nor when the deed of the premises was executed, nor when the defendant vacated the premises, in use as a fence, nor was it [643]*643fit for a fence or designed to be so used. It was therefore no part of the realty by reason of being a fence. It was in fact just what the owner and lessee understood it to be, not a fence, but “ dead wood ” which the lessee was to have, and this long' before the deed.

Judgment reversed, and judgment for the defendant for costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Veazey, J.

The portion of the former rail fence that was taken away by the defendant, was not when so taken, nor when the deed of the premises was executed, nor when the defendant vacated the premises, in use as a fence, nor was it [643]*643fit for a fence or designed to be so used. It was therefore no part of the realty by reason of being a fence. It was in fact just what the owner and lessee understood it to be, not a fence, but “ dead wood ” which the lessee was to have, and this long' before the deed.

Judgment reversed, and judgment for the defendant for costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 Vt. 641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fullington-v-goodwin-vt-1885.