Peters v. Goodrich
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. THIS was a bill in chancery, brought originally to the county court in Middlesex county, praying for a foreclosure ot mortgaged premises.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. THIS was a bill in chancery, brought originally to the county court in Middlesex county, praying for a foreclosure ot mortgaged premises. The bill stated, that on the 27th of July, 1813, John Curtiss made his promissory note, of that date, for the sum of 400 dollars, payable in ninety days, at the Mid-dletown bank, to C. and D. Churchill, or order, and by them indorsed; that the plaintiff, on the same day, at the request of Curtiss, and for his accommodation and benefit, and to enable him to procure the note to be received and discounted by the Middletown bank, indorsed it, after…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
1. Whether the subject matter of the bill was within the cognizance of the county court, is the firsl point of enquiry.
The jurisdiction of the court is tested, by the value of the mortgaged premises. From the bill it appears, that it did not exceed the sum of three hundred thirty-five dollars; and to this limit, the authority of the county court extends.
The plea to the jurisdiction was correctly overruled, as it averred no fact in an issuable shape. The value of the property mortgaged should have been specifically alleged, that the adverse party might know the matter relied on…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. Hooe Et Al.Supreme Court of the United States · 1805
3Cited by20 opinions
- Fenno v. SayreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1842
- Avery v. ChappelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
- Bolles v. ChaunceySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
- Inhabitants of Montville v. HaughtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
- Abbe v. GoodwinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.