Daniel Miner's Executrix v. Sarah Shanasy And Others

Decision Date13 December 1917
Citation102 A. 480,92 Vt. 110
CourtVermont Supreme Court

May Term, 1917.

APPEAL IN CHANCERY. Heard on bill, answer and facts found in vacation after the June Term, 1916, Caledonia County, Slack Chancellor. Decree for defendants. Plaintiff appealed. The opinion states the case.

Decree reversed and cause remanded.

H P. Dee and M. H. Alexander for plaintiff.

W H. Fairchild for defendant, H. S. Soule, Administrator.

No appearance for the other defendants.



This is a bill in chancery the object of which is to transfer a suit at law from the Franklin County court to the court of chancery, that the plaintiff may interpose the equitable defence of laches with the defence of the statute of limitations, and to obtain an injunction against the defendants, Sarah, Fred and Elizabeth Shanasy, and for the appointment of a receiver.

A temporary injunction was granted by the chancellor at the time the original bill was filed against all the defendants restraining the further prosecution of the suit at law until further order of court.

The defendant, Sarah Shanasy, answered, admitting the facts alleged in the bill and the defendant, Harry S. Soul, answered denying some of the allegations of the bill and admitting others, and no answer was made by the other defendants.

Afterwards the cause came on for hearing before the chancellor and a full hearing was had by him respecting the matters embraced in the suit at law. Facts were found and a decree thereupon rendered. Among other things it was decreed that said lease was a valid, subsisting and continuing obligation against the estate of Daniel Miner and that there was due and owing from his estate the sum of $ 963.37, and that there would become due annually thereafter the sum of $ 210 on the first day of November in each year "as long as wood grows and water runs," or until the estate of said Miner shall have paid or caused to be paid to the estate of Samuel H. Soule the sum of $ 3,500, in excess of any accrued rent. From this decree the plaintiff appealed to this Court. The defendant, Soule, in his answer, objected that said suit at law could not be transferred to the court of chancery, the county court having acquired competent and complete jurisdiction of that matter at the time the bill was brought. It is stated in 7 R. C. L. 1067, par. 105, as follows:

"It is a familiar principle that when a court of competent jurisdiction acquires jurisdiction of the subject-matter of a case, its authority continues subject only to the appellate authority, until the matter is finally and completely disposed of, and no court of coordinate authority is at liberty to interfere with its action." To the same effect is Whittier v. McFarland, 79 Vt. 365, 65 A. 81.

The chancellor should have dismissed the bill as soon as it came to his attention that the court of chancery had no jurisdiction of the cause; International Paper Co. v. Bellows Falls Canal Co., 91 Vt. 350, 100 A. 684; Holt v. Daniels, 61 Vt. 89, 17 A 786; Lumber Co. v. Lyman, 89 Vt. 201, 94 A. 837. It has been a rule of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Barnet Glass v. Newport Clothing Co., Inc. & Tr
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • October 3, 1939
    ... ... Miner's Exrx. v ... Shanasy, 92 Vt. 110, 112, 102 A. 480; Fillmore, ... ...
  • State v. Dean Barnett
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • January 7, 1939
    ... ... Executrix v. Shanasy et al. , 92 Vt. 110, 102 A ... inconvenience of others. We cannot disregard the presumption ... of ... ...
  • Essex Storage Electric Company, Inc. v. Victory Lumber Co.
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • October 9, 1919
    ... ... 330, ... 100 A. 877; Miner's Exrx. v. Shanasy, ... 92 Vt. 110, 102 A. 480) applies. For, the ... concerning them. But lest others be misled, we consider it ... worth while to ... ...
  • Homer C. Smith v. Joseph White Estate
    • United States
    • Vermont Supreme Court
    • January 5, 1937
    ... ... Miner's Exrx. v. Shanasy, 92 Vt ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT