State v. Stone

Supreme Court of Vermont

State v. Stone

54 Vt. 550

DecidedJanuary 15, 1882

StatusPublished

This text of 54 Vt. 550 (State v. Stone) 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. Stone, 54 Vt. 550 (Vt. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Taft, J.

This was a prosecution for keeping and maintaining a nuisance under sec. 3836, R. L. The complaint is in the form given by statute, except that it is not alleged that the place designated was. “ used as a place of resort.” The case is before us upon demurrer to the complaint. The want of such allegation renders the complaint insufficient in matter of substance. It is proper for any court, where a complaint for such an offense is pending, to permit an amendment of the same at any stage of the proceedings. R. L., sec. 3865. The respondent did not indicate, in the court below, the defect complained of; if he had, no doubt it would have been promptly remedied. He having an opportunity to do so, and, evidently, knowingly omitting it, a majority of the court think the case should be made an exception to the rule laid down in State v. Kennedy, 36 Vt. 563, where the court refused, in its discretion, to allow an amendment not moved for in the County Court. The complaint may be amended, the exceptions are overruled, judgment reversed pro forma, and the case remanded to the City Court for trial.

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

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Taft, J.

This was a prosecution for keeping and maintaining a nuisance under sec. 3836, R. L. The complaint is in the form given by statute, except that it is not alleged that the place designated was. “ used as a place of resort.” The case is before us upon demurrer to the complaint. The want of such allegation renders the complaint insufficient in matter of substance. It is proper for any court, where a complaint for such an offense is pending, to permit an amendment of the same at any stage of the proceedings. R. L., sec. 3865. The respondent did not indicate, in the court below, the defect complained of; if he had, no doubt it would have been promptly remedied. He having an opportunity to do so, and, evidently, knowingly omitting it, a majority of the court think the case should be made an exception to the rule laid down in State v. Kennedy, 36 Vt. 563, where the court refused, in its discretion, to allow an amendment not moved for in the County Court. The complaint may be amended, the exceptions are overruled, judgment reversed pro forma, and the case remanded to the City Court for trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 Vt. 550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-stone-vt-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack