Colburn v. Tolles
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. The plaintiff in the original action described himself in the writ, as “ Henry Tolies, of Orange, in the county of Haven, and state of Connecticut.”
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. The plaintiff in the original action described himself in the writ, as “ Henry Tolies, of Orange, in the county of Haven, and state of Connecticut.” To the present writ of error, brought by Colburn, Tolies pleaded in abatement as follows: “ And now the said Henry Tolies, the defendant in error, comes into court and prays judgment of the plaintiff in said writ of error, and that the same may- abate; because he says, that the said writ of error was no otherwise served upon him, the defendant in error, than by leaving a true and attested copy thereof, at his last usual place of abode…
1Opinion of the CourtChurch, J.
The questions in this case arise under a demurrer to a plea in abatement for defective service of the writ of error.
The plea in abatement does not pray judgment of the declaration, and the matters therein contained, but only of the writ. As the only defect complained of, is in the service of the writ, there could be no necessity, nor hardly a propriety, in praying judgment of the declaration.
This plea is not verified by affidavit, nor signed by the party. These formalities have never been required, by our practice.
*527Pleas in abatement must be framed with the greatest certainty of averment. But…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Draper v. MoriartySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1878
- Wilcox v. ChambersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1867
- Cady v. GaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1863