Noyes v. Fitzgerald
This text of 55 Vt. 49 (Noyes v. Fitzgerald) 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.
Opinion
The opinion of the court was delivered by
This evidence was too remote. It stands on no stronger ground than the rule that distant markets cannot be consulted in proof of values unless the markets are in some way inter-dependent o^sympathetic. 2 Whart. Ev. s. 1290; Rice v. Manly, 66 N. Y. 82. No more liberal rule should be adopted here. Prices in the same vicinity may be shown. Vilas v. Downer, 21 Vt. 419, followed in Stanton v. Embrey, 93 U. S. 557. In Benham v. Dunbar, 103 Mass. 369, it is said that if the value of a town lot was in question, evidence as to the value of other lots should be confined to sales of comparatively recent date and of lots in the near vicinity.
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
55 Vt. 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noyes-v-fitzgerald-vt-1883.