State v. Cruickshank

42 A. 983, 71 Vt. 94, 1899 Vt. LEXIS 141
CourtSupreme Court of Vermont
DecidedJanuary 26, 1899
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 42 A. 983 (State v. Cruickshank) 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
State v. Cruickshank, 42 A. 983, 71 Vt. 94, 1899 Vt. LEXIS 141 (Vt. 1899).

Opinion

Rowell, J.

This complaint lacks substance. It alleges that the respondent did ride a bicycle along and upon the sidewalk on a certain street in the city of Barre, “in violation of sections twenty-five and thirty-six of chapter thirteen of the ordinances of said city,” contra formam stattih. It should have set out the ordinances, as the court cannot take judicial notice of them. State v. Soragan, 40 Vt. 450.

It properly concluded against the form of the statute. State v. Soragan. Perhaps it should also have concluded against the form of the ordinances.

Judgment reversed, demurrer sustained, complaint adjudged insufficient, and cause remanded.

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

Related

Hambley v. Town of St. Johnsbury
290 A.2d 18 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1972)
State v. Pelletier
185 A.2d 456 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1962)
State v. Tyrrell
122 A. 924 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1923)
State v. Bosworth
52 A. 423 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 A. 983, 71 Vt. 94, 1899 Vt. LEXIS 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-cruickshank-vt-1899.