Bronson Willey v. Frank Laraway
| Decision Date | 01 August 1892 |
| Parties | BRONSON WILLEY v. FRANK LARAWAY |
| Court | Vermont Supreme Court |
AUGUST TERM, 1892
Judgment affirmed.
B A. Hunt, for the defendant.
P K. Gleed, for the plaintiff.
As the plaintiff's costs were taxed and allowed in the court below, his damages and costs exceeded the sum tendered thereon by the defendant. The defendant insists however, that illegal fees, to an amount greater than this excess, were included in the allowance. But we think both the items objected to by the defendant were properly taxed. The copy required of an officer in serving process is a copy of the writ and his return, and he is entitled to compensation for the folios of the entire copy. The provision allowing a reasonable sum for securing attached property is not inapplicable where the attachment is by lodging a copy in the town clerk's office. Property so attached is held to be in the custody of the officer; and he is liable for a failure to produce it, unless he can excuse himself by showing that he exercised the same degree of care regarding it that is required in the case of property taken into actual possession. Smith v. Church, 27 Vt. 168; McKOrmsby v. Morris, 29 Vt. 417; Fay v. Munson, 40 Vt. 468. In the exercise of this care, it often becomes necessary for the officer to take measures for securing the property after lodging the copy. It is evident that the necessity existed in this case, for it appears that the officer found that certain portions of the attached property were being disposed of.
The plaintiff's failure to state the amount of the accrued cost on request cannot relieve the defendant from the consequences of this deficiency in the amount tendered. The plaintiff was under no obligation to provide a taxation or state the amount. The case did not involve any costs that were peculiarly within his knowledge. See Smith v. Wilbur, 35 Vt. 133. The fees which the defendant sought to cover are either fixed by statute, or determined by the officer under legal restrictions; and the amount can ordinarily be readily ascertained by either party. It does not appear from the report of the clerk that the defendant was prevented from obtaining information from either the officer or the writ, by any act of the plaintiff or his counsel.
But if the tender had been sufficient in amount, it would have been ineffectual because not made within the time allowed by statute. A...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Birdzell v. Jorgenson
... ... 539 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA, EX REL. LUTHER E. BIRDZELL, Frank E. Packard, and George E. Wallace, Members of the North Dakota Tax ... French, 12 Ill. 302; People v ... Walker, 17 N.Y. 502; Willey v. Laraway, 64 Vt ... 566, 25 A. 435; Bemis v. Leonard, 118 Mass ... ...
-
John E. Hill Et Ux. v. Arthur P. Scott
... ... Plea, ... general issue. Trial by Orleans County municipal court, Frank ... C. Williams, Municipal Judge, presiding. Judgment for ... Bacon, 49 Vt. 20, 21, 22, 24 A. R. 100; ... Willey v. Laraway, 64 Vt. 566, 567, 25 A ... 435. An insufficient tender, even ... ...
-
State ex rel. St. George v. Justice Court of Silver Bow Tp., Sliver Bow County
...639, 49 L. R. A. 193 (and other Texas cases); Millard v. Willard, 3 R. I. 42; Goldsworthy v. Coyle, 19 R.I. 323, 33 A. 466; Willey v. Laraway, 64 Vt. 566, 25 A. 435; Greve v. St. P., S. & T. F. R. Co., 25 Minn. Jones v. State, 42 Ark. 93; Knoxville C. M. Co. v. Lovinger, 83 Ga. 563, 10 S.E.......
-
Henderson v. Edwards
...three days next preceding the commencement of the term, and that the first day of the term, therefore, cannot be counted. Willey v. Laraway, 64 Vt. 566, 25 A. 435. record before us discloses that September 19th was Sunday. We must presume that the trial judge knew this, and that it was not ......