Legal Opinion

Blinn v. Chester

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided November 15, 1812PublishedCited by 5 opinions

IN ERROR. THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought to the County Court, by Chester against Blinn, on a promissory note, for the sum of 151. 6s. 2d. lawful money, dated the first day oí January, 1793. The defendant pleaded, that after the date and execution of the note, and before the date of the plaintiff’s writ, he performed labour and services, as a carpenter and joiner, on a dwelling-house, which the plaintiff was then building, to the amount of the principal and interest…

Read the full summary

IN ERROR. THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought to the County Court, by Chester against Blinn, on a promissory note, for the sum of 151. 6s. 2d. lawful money, dated the first day oí January, 1793. The defendant pleaded, that after the date and execution of the note, and before the date of the plaintiff’s writ, he performed labour and services, as a carpenter and joiner, on a dwelling-house, which the plaintiff was then building, to the amount of the principal and interest of the money expressed in the note, and in full satisfaction thereof; and that the plaintiff accepted and received such…

1Opinion of the CourtTrumbull, J.

(After stating the case.) The only question in this case, is, whether the evidence rejected, is by law, admissible and relevant ?

This evidence was rejected, apparently, on the ground, that it sets up a parol agreement accompanying the note, w hich will alter, add to, or change the written contract, or annex to it a parol condition, on the performance of which, the note was to become void. If this be a just view of the subject, the evidence is clearly inadmissible.

The plea states an accord and satisfaction, subsequent to the date and execution of the note. This Is, clearly, a good bar. But an…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Jones v. GranthamSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  2. Larned v. City of DubuqueSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892
  3. Lange v. PerleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Pope v. TunstallSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1840
  5. Seymour v. GoodrichSupreme Court of Virginia · 1885

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

Powered by the Exa API