Stewart v. Inhabitants of Sherman
Supreme Court of Connecticut
A new trial having been granted, pursuant to the decision of this Court, (4 Conn. Rep. 553-7.) the cause was tried again, at Danbury, September term, 1823, before Brainard, J. To shew that Wright, for whose support the action was brought, was not a pauper, within the meaning of the law, the defendant introduced evidence tending to prove, that during all the time the plaintiff supported Wright, the plaintiff had in his hand a promissory note belonging to Wright, against one…
Read the full summary
A new trial having been granted, pursuant to the decision of this Court, (4 Conn. Rep. 553-7.) the cause was tried again, at Danbury, September term, 1823, before Brainard, J. To shew that Wright, for whose support the action was brought, was not a pauper, within the meaning of the law, the defendant introduced evidence tending to prove, that during all the time the plaintiff supported Wright, the plaintiff had in his hand a promissory note belonging to Wright, against one Sylvanus Stewart, a man of property; and one part of such evidence was the testimony of Ezra Graves, one of the…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
Two questions are raised in this case ; 1st Whether the testimony was duly admitted; and 2ndly, Whether the charge to the jury, in one particular, was correct.
1. To show that Wright was not a pauper, within the meaning of the law, testimony was adduced, by the defendant, to prove, that the plaintiff had in his hands, during the supplies advanced, a promissory note, in favour of the said Wright, and against one Sylvanus Stewart, a man of property ; and that a conversation and negotiation were had concerning the delivery of the note to the select-men of Sherman, at which time the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Town of Rhine v. City of SheboyganWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- Jasper County v. OsbornSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Robinson v. FerrySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Hazen v. HenrySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1845