Legal Opinion

Walcott v. Canfield

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided October 28, 1819PublishedCited by 6 opinions

In an action against Timothy Canfield, lchabod Curtiss, Aaron Hosmer, Eli Ensign, Samuel Sherman and Solomon Vol-kenburg, the plaintiff declared as follows : “ That on the 5th day of June, 1818, the defendants were, and for a long time before, had been, and ever since have continued to be, joint partners in the business of running a line of stages from Hartford to Albany, for the purpose of conveying passengers, with their baggage and other things, from said Hartford to said…

Read the full summary

In an action against Timothy Canfield, lchabod Curtiss, Aaron Hosmer, Eli Ensign, Samuel Sherman and Solomon Vol-kenburg, the plaintiff declared as follows : “ That on the 5th day of June, 1818, the defendants were, and for a long time before, had been, and ever since have continued to be, joint partners in the business of running a line of stages from Hartford to Albany, for the purpose of conveying passengers, with their baggage and other things, from said Hartford to said Albany. And the defendants were", on said 5th day of June, public and common carriers from said Hartford to said…

1Opinion of the Court

Hosmer, Ch. J.

The declaration alleges, that the defendants were proprietors of a line of stages from Hartford to Albany; and that, in consideration of six dollars and fifty cents, they undertook to transport the plaintiff and his baggage from the former to the latter place, in a certain specified time. This engagement they did not perform; and for the damage arising from non-performance, this action is brought.

To prove the contract averred, the plaintiff offered in evidence an advertisement, which Canfield procured to be printed, and acknowledged that he had distributed in the community. As…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gill v. Petrazzuoli Bros.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1987
  2. Whittaker v. CollinsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  3. Pease v. ColeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1885
  4. Henry v. HickmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
  5. Fetz v. C. S. Clark & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1862

1 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