Marcy v. Crawford
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This was an action of assumpsit for work and labour performed and services rendered; also for money paid, laid out and expended, by the defendant, for the plaintiff, and at his request ; brought originally, by Charles Crawford against Leonard Marcy, before a justice of the peace, and appealed to the county court; in which the cause was tried, March term, 1843. On the trial, the plaintiff claimed and offered evidence to prove, that John Crawford had commenced and…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was an action of assumpsit for work and labour performed and services rendered; also for money paid, laid out and expended, by the defendant, for the plaintiff, and at his request ; brought originally, by Charles Crawford against Leonard Marcy, before a justice of the peace, and appealed to the county court; in which the cause was tried, March term, 1843. On the trial, the plaintiff claimed and offered evidence to prove, that John Crawford had commenced and prosecuted to final judgment against Samuel P. Crawford, an action of trespass for unlawfully entering upon the land of…
1Opinion of the Court
Hinman, J,
The fourth and last cause assigned for error, has not been insisted upon in the argument; and the only notice it is necessary to take of it, is, to say, that the record shows no facts from which this claim, as made in the writ of error, can arise in the case. It does not appear from the bill of exceptions, what the charge of the county court was upon this claim; nor does it appear, that the court was requested to charge the jury upon it. In the absence, then, of any evidence of this sort, the presumption is, that if the court gave any instructions to the jury upon the subject, it…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Anderson v. SpenceIndiana Supreme Court · 1880
- Smith v. DelaneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
- Wolthausen v. TrimpertSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Mays v. JosephOhio Supreme Court · 1877
- Weir v. Hum TongMontana Supreme Court · 1935