Lawton v. Town of Weathersfield

Supreme Court of Vermont

Lawton v. Town of Weathersfield

51 A. 1062, 74 Vt. 41, 1901 Vt. LEXIS 110

DecidedNovember 30, 1901

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A. 1062 (Lawton v. Town of Weathersfield) 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

Lawton v. Town of Weathersfield, 51 A. 1062, 74 Vt. 41, 1901 Vt. LEXIS 110 (Vt. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

Taft, C. J.

Any town in this State is liable for its neglect to keep in repair any bridge or culvert, if any person is injured thereby. In order to maintain an action to recover damages for such injuries, notice must be given within a cer[43]*43tain time to the town. V. S. 3492. One provision of the statute with reference to the notice is, that it shall state “that such person will claim satisfaction of the town.” It further provides that unless such notice is given, “no action shall be maintained in any court.” In this case the plaintiff, within the required time, gave the defendant notice of the accident and of her injury, but omitted to state therein that she would “claim satisfaction of the town.” There is nothing in the notice to that effect, nor from which it can be reasonably inferred. It being defective in that respect, no action can be maintained.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Taft, C. J.

Any town in this State is liable for its neglect to keep in repair any bridge or culvert, if any person is injured thereby. In order to maintain an action to recover damages for such injuries, notice must be given within a cer[43]*43tain time to the town. V. S. 3492. One provision of the statute with reference to the notice is, that it shall state “that such person will claim satisfaction of the town.” It further provides that unless such notice is given, “no action shall be maintained in any court.” In this case the plaintiff, within the required time, gave the defendant notice of the accident and of her injury, but omitted to state therein that she would “claim satisfaction of the town.” There is nothing in the notice to that effect, nor from which it can be reasonably inferred. It being defective in that respect, no action can be maintained.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A. 1062, 74 Vt. 41, 1901 Vt. LEXIS 110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawton-v-town-of-weathersfield-vt-1901.