Scofield v. Lounsbury
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This was an action of trover for a cow, brought originally, by Scofield against Lounsbury, the captain of a militia company to which the plaintiff belonged, and Earl Smith, a constable of the town of Stamford, in which both the parties lived.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was an action of trover for a cow, brought originally, by Scofield against Lounsbury, the captain of a militia company to which the plaintiff belonged, and Earl Smith, a constable of the town of Stamford, in which both the parties lived. On the trial before the county court, it was admitted, that the cow of the plaintiff was taken, by a warrant, issued by the defendant, Lounsbury, as captain of the company, and was executed by the other defendant, Smith, as constable. The defence was, that these proceedings were in pursuance of law. The plaintiff claimed, that the proceedings…
1Opinion of the CourtDaggett, J.
The only question on this writ of error, is, whether the county court erred in admitting testimony to shew the mistake in the commission, and to correct that mistake. On this question I can entertain no doubt. The authority of the officer of a military company, is derived from the choice of the company. The commission is only evidence of the authority, and not like that of records, of conveyances of land and of judgments of courts. Strictness is required, in such cases; and identity is essential. A judgment of court against Edwin, cannot, by possibility, be against Edward ; but no such…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Inhabitants of Litchfield v. Inhabitants of FarmingtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1828