Legal Opinion

Reynolds v. Geary

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 15, 1857PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Action of assumpsit upon a promissory note, tried to the court upon the general issue with notice, at the term of the superior court holden in Middlesex county, in February, 1857. The following facts were found by the court. The note in question was given by the defendant to the plaintiffs to settle an account which, except one charge of sixty-three cents for cash advanced, consisted of charges for spiritous liquors sold by them to the defendant.

Read the full summary

Action of assumpsit upon a promissory note, tried to the court upon the general issue with notice, at the term of the superior court holden in Middlesex county, in February, 1857. The following facts were found by the court. The note in question was given by the defendant to the plaintiffs to settle an account which, except one charge of sixty-three cents for cash advanced, consisted of charges for spiritous liquors sold by them to the defendant. The sale was made in the city of New York, with knowledge on the part of the plaintiffs that the liquors were to be sold by the defendant in…

1Opinion of the CourtEllsworth, J.

We think there is no error in the judgment of the court below.

It appears that the note in question was given in the state of New York, for spiritous liquors sold by the plaintiffs to the defendant. They were sold with knowledge that the defendant purchased them to bring into this state, to sell contrary to our statute law, and with the intent to enable the defendant to violate this law.

Had there been, on the part of the plaintiffs, no more than an opinion or knowledge that the defendant made the purchase with the intention of bringing the liquors here for sale, this, according to the books,…

2Cited by11 opinions

  1. Cohen v. WrightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
  2. Martin v. BlattnerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  3. Brown v. SmartCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1888
  4. Bonaparte v. Baltimore, Hampden & Lake Roland RailroadCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1892
  5. Fuchs v. Common CouncilMichigan Supreme Court · 1911

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API