Pitkin v. Munsell
This text of 97 A. 657 (Pitkin v. Munsell) 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 plaintiff moved for a close jail certificate. At the time of rendering judgment on the verdict, the court found that the defendant, at the time of the injury complained of, was a boy thirteen years of age, "too young to fully comprehend, in the judgment of the court, the consequences of his act;” that his riding on the sidewalk, and his act or neglect which caused the injury, "was (were) wilful, but the injury was accidental and without malice. ’ ’ The court did not adjudge in connection therewith "that the defendant ought to be confined in close jail,” without which no certificate could be granted. P. S. 2106; In re Wheelock, 13 Vt. 375.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
97 A. 657, 90 Vt. 268, 1916 Vt. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pitkin-v-munsell-vt-1916.