Hazard v. Slade

Supreme Court of Vermont

Hazard v. Slade

1 D. Chip. 199

CourtSupreme Court of Vermont

DecidedJanuary 15, 1814

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1 D. Chip. 199 (Hazard v. Slade) 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

Hazard v. Slade, 1 D. Chip. 199 (Vt. 1814).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

• It must be a real, not- merely an ostensible sufficiency. The words of the statute are, “ The officer serving such process, (attachments on mense process) shall not be made liable for the insufficiency of such surety or sureties, if he shall, on trial, make it appear that, at the time of receiving such said surety or sureties, the same were amply sufficient. A mere ostensible sufficiency will not excuse, it must be real and ample, a substantial responsibility in point of property, and such as would probably continue so, to answer the demand.

Verdict for the plaintiff.

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

By the Court.

• It must be a real, not- merely an ostensible sufficiency. The words of the statute are, “ The officer serving such process, (attachments on mense process) shall not be made liable for the insufficiency of such surety or sureties, if he shall, on trial, make it appear that, at the time of receiving such said surety or sureties, the same were amply sufficient. A mere ostensible sufficiency will not excuse, it must be real and ample, a substantial responsibility in point of property, and such as would probably continue so, to answer the demand.

Verdict for the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 D. Chip. 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hazard-v-slade-vt-1814.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack