Gaylord v. Couch
Supreme Court of Connecticut
in ERROR. THIS was a petition in chancery, against the plaintiffs in error. was a petition in chancery, brought by Couch It was alleged in the petition, that on the 30th day of June, 1798, the petitioner was indebted to one David Tibialis, in the sum of 18Z. for which he held his promissory note, and also, in certain other sums, amounting to the sum of about 100 dollars, for which he also held certain other promissory notes; that to secure the payment of the sums contained…
Read the full summary
in ERROR. THIS was a petition in chancery, against the plaintiffs in error. was a petition in chancery, brought by Couch It was alleged in the petition, that on the 30th day of June, 1798, the petitioner was indebted to one David Tibialis, in the sum of 18Z. for which he held his promissory note, and also, in certain other sums, amounting to the sum of about 100 dollars, for which he also held certain other promissory notes; that to secure the payment of the sums contained in such notes, the petitioner, on the day last mentioned, by deed of bargain and sale, conveyed to Tibballs, a certain…
1Opinion of the CourtSjirm, J.
This is a writ of error, brought to reverse a decree of the Superior Court, sitting as a court of chancery, passed upon a petition in which Thomas Couch was petition- or, and liada I Gaylord, and others, administrators of the estate of David Tibballs, deceased, were respondents. A committee was appointed, by the court below, to report the facts in the case; whose finding must have been the basis of the decrée, passed by the court, and will be the foun-datiun of my opinion. It will be unnecessary for me, to notice all the facts, found by the committee, which they, how-e\er, reported at great…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Gest v. GestSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Broome v. BeersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1826
- Skinner v. BaileySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
- Beers v. BotsfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1839
- Buffum v. DeaneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1855