Laplante v. Camp

120 A. 860, 96 Vt. 412, 1923 Vt. LEXIS 187
Supreme Court of Vermont·Decided April 3, 1923·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Miles, J.

This is an action to recover damages caused by an injury resulting from a collision between the motorcycle of the plaintiff and the automobile of the defendants. The case was heard by court and judgment was rendered for the plaintiff.

The only exceptions raised and relied upon by the defendants are (1) “to the failure of the court to find as requested by them in their requests for further findings,” and (2) “to the findings as made,” and (3) to the judgment.

[413]*413Of exceptions (1) and (2) it is enough to say that they point out no error and are too general to require attention. Landon v. Hunt, 82 Vt. 322, 73 Atl. 865; Platt v. Shields et al., 96 Vt. 257, 119 Atl. 520.

As no question is raised by the exceptions as to the sufficiency of the findings to support the judgment rendered, this Court will not look back of the findings to test the sufficiency of the evidence to. support the judgment. Morgan v. Gould et al., 96 Vt. 275, 119 A. 517. The exception to the judgment is not well taken.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Laplante v. Camp, 120 A. 860, 96 Vt. 412, 1923 Vt. LEXIS 187 (Vt. 1923).

120 A. 860 (Laplante v. Camp) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Burlington Building & Loan Ass'n v. Cummings
17 A.2d 319 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1941)
Finn v. Holden
175 A. 231 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1934)
Royal Bank of Canada v. Girard
135 A. 497 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1927)