Torts · MBE-tested

ANDREW against CONRO

1 Brayt. 72·Vermont Supreme Court·1816·VT

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

No. 4. ANDREW against CONRO. Franklin, 1816. IT appeared that the declaration complained of an assault and battery on personal property; there was a plea of not guilty, to the assault and battery, and issue closed to the Jury thereon; there was a farther plea in bar, justifying the trespass upon the property, to which there was a replication of de inju-ra, &c. concluded to the country, to this there' was a special demurrer and joinder. The record shewed no trial of the issue of fact and no other judgment,except in these words: “Damages $53; Cost $37,58; Agreed to.” A plea in abatement to the writ óf error,- alledg» itíg that there was no judgment. Replication : There was a judgment and execution for the said sum of $53 damages, $37,58 costs. Demurrer. [MAJORITY] The Court decided. There was error in the record and judgment of the County Court, and that the same be set aside,&c. and the cause continued for this Court to render such judgment ás the County Court ought to have rendered.