Wright v. Taplin & Rowell

Decided July 1, 1893

Supreme Court of Vermont · decided 1893-07-01

Assumpsit. Plea, the general issue. Trial by jury at the September term, 1892, Thompson, J., presiding. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. The defendants except. The plaintiff offered in support of his case a chattel mortgage from one Miles to Cad P. Bridgman, which was sworn to before the town clerk of the town of Hardwick. At the time of the execution of the mortgage Miles resided in Hard-wick and the mortgage was recorded in the town clerk’s office in that town.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently November 1901

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1893-07-01

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

ROWELL, J.

¶1Town 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 *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.

¶2Chattel 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.

¶3Judgment affirmed.