Batchelder v. Barber

Decided October 15, 1894

Supreme Court of Vermont · decided 1894-10-15

Assumpsit. Plea, the general issue, with notice of statute of limitations. Heard upon the report of a referee at the June term, 1894, Bennington county, Taft, J., presiding. Judgment fro forma for the plaintiff. The defendant excepts. The burden is upon the plaintiff to show that the defendant had no attachable property in Vermont while absent from the state. Stevens v. Fisher, 30 Vt. 200.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently October 1896

1 state decisions

Relies on Stevens v. Fisher

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1894-10-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

TAFT, J.

¶1Two questions were argued in this cause by the counsel for the defendant, but it is unnecessary to consider them, for the plaintiff concedes that he cannot recover the amount of the draft in question, for that it does not appear that the defendant while residing without the state did not have known property within the state that could have been attached by the common process of law. To entitle him to recover, it was necessary he should establish that fact. Stevens v. Fisher, 30 Vt. 200.

¶2Judgment reversed, and judgment for the plaintiff ■for the smaller sum named in the report.