endomorphosis/Caselaw_Access_Project_JSON

1"{\"id\": \"4417123\", \"name\": \"John Stimpson v. Jacob A. Cummings\", \"name_abbreviation\": \"Stimpson v. Cummings\", \"decision_date\": \"1843-02\", \"docket_number\": \"\", \"first_page\": \"787\", \"last_page\": \"788\", \"citations\": \"15 Vt. 787\", \"volume\": \"15\", \"reporter\": \"Vermont Reports\", \"court\": \"Vermont Supreme Court\", \"jurisdiction\": \"Vermont\", \"last_updated\": \"2021-08-10T17:27:29.990568+00:00\", \"provenance\": \"CAP\", \"judges\": \"\", \"parties\": \"John Stimpson v. Jacob A. Cummings.\", \"head_matter\": \"John Stimpson v. Jacob A. Cummings.\\nExceptions may be entered in the supreme court, although a term of that court may have intervened after the taking of the exceptions, in a case where a motion for a new trial is pending, until after such intervening term.\\nThe verdict in this case, in the county court, was found November term, 1840, but the case was not entered in this .court until February term, 1842.\\nThe party, in whose favor the judgment below was rendered, now moved to dismiss the exceptions, on the ground that the case should have been entered in this court at the next term after the exceptions were taken in the county court. It appeared, by referring to the docket entries, that there had been pending in the county court a motion for a new trial until the May term, 1841.\", \"word_count\": \"181\", \"char_count\": \"998\", \"text\": \"By the Court.\\nThis was a sufficient reason for not bringing the exceptions into this court. They could not have been entertained here, until the motion for a new trial had been disposed of in the county court.\"}"