Wright v. Taplin & Rowell

65 Vt. 448
CourtSupreme Court of Vermont
DecidedJuly 1, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 65 Vt. 448 (Wright v. Taplin & Rowell) 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
Wright v. Taplin & Rowell, 65 Vt. 448 (Vt. 1893).

Opinion

ROWELL, J.

Town clerks may administer oaths when the instrument to be sworn to is “ returnable ” to their office. R. L. 2,689. This means when the instrument must be deposited in their office or filed and recorded there, either to make it good at all or good as to third persons or against the world. The word returnable, as here used, must have [449]*449that meaning in order to give the statute practical effect; for there are no instruments returnable to the town clerk’s office ■ in the strict sense in which writs and other process are returnable to the court or other authority issuing them.

Chattel mortgages, in order to be good against the world, must be recorded in the proper town clerk’s office, unless possession of the property is delivered to the mortgagee. Hence, they may be sworn to before the proper town clerk.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Potter v. Lewis
51 A. 5 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
65 Vt. 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-taplin-rowell-vt-1893.