Sandford v. Rose

Supreme Court of Vermont

Sandford v. Rose

2 Tyl. 428

CourtSupreme Court of Vermont

DecidedMay 15, 1803

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 Tyl. 428 (Sandford v. Rose) 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

Sandford v. Rose, 2 Tyl. 428 (Vt. 1803).

Pincite

Opinion

Curia.

(Jacob, Assistant Judge, absente.)

The Court are of opinion, that the evidence may be well admitted. The construction of the statute “ regulating the conveyances of real estate, and for the prevention of frauds therein,” contended for by the de[431]*431fendant’s counsel, cannot be correct; for it would go to convert a beneficial statute, made expressly for the prevention of fraud, into an engine of fraud. "

Chauncey Langdon and Darius Chipman, for plaintiff.

The evidence will be admitted.

The cause was continued for trial, and afterwards, on the decease of Rose, was accommodated.

--, for defendant.

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

Curia.

(Jacob, Assistant Judge, absente.)

The Court are of opinion, that the evidence may be well admitted. The construction of the statute “ regulating the conveyances of real estate, and for the prevention of frauds therein,” contended for by the de[431]*431fendant’s counsel, cannot be correct; for it would go to convert a beneficial statute, made expressly for the prevention of fraud, into an engine of fraud. "

Chauncey Langdon and Darius Chipman, for plaintiff.

The evidence will be admitted.

The cause was continued for trial, and afterwards, on the decease of Rose, was accommodated.

--, for defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Tyl. 428, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sandford-v-rose-vt-1803.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack