Legal Opinion

Bradley v. Davenport

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 15, 1825PublishedCited by 4 opinions

IN error. This was an action of assumpsit ; in which the plaintiff stated his cause of action in two counts. In the first, he averred, That the defendant, on the 1st of May, 1819, entered into the possession of three pieces of land [particularly described] of which the plaintiff then was and for a long time previously had been, seised and possessed; and that the defendant had ever since continued to occupy and enjoy the same, taking all the rents and profits to himself, and…

Read the full summary

IN error. This was an action of assumpsit ; in which the plaintiff stated his cause of action in two counts. In the first, he averred, That the defendant, on the 1st of May, 1819, entered into the possession of three pieces of land [particularly described] of which the plaintiff then was and for a long time previously had been, seised and possessed; and that the defendant had ever since continued to occupy and enjoy the same, taking all the rents and profits to himself, and became liable to pay to the plaintiff what the use of said lands was reasonably worth; and that in consideration of the…

1Opinion of the CourtBristol, J.

The declaration contains two counts; one of which is special; the other a general indebitatus assumpsit for the use and occupation of land. To this declaration there is a special demurrer : and the cause of special demurrer assigned, as respects both, is, that it is not stated in either count, that the land was occupied by the sufferance or permission of the plaintiff, or at the defendant’s special instance and request.

The Court are of opinion that the defect is fatal. The question on both counts is nearly the same ; but as the arguments of counsel were directed chiefly in support of the…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Chapel-High Corp. v. CavallaroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
  2. Andrews v. ThayerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1873
  3. Canfield v. MerrickSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
  4. Schenectady Discount Corp. v. MattConnecticut Appellate Court · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API