Betts v. Lockwood
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was a petition for the benefit of the insolvent act, brought by Philer Betts against his creditors. At the term of the superior court, in September, 1830, the petitioner and Edmund Lockwood, one of the respondents, appeared and were fully heard. The other respondents suffered a default.
Read the full summary
This was a petition for the benefit of the insolvent act, brought by Philer Betts against his creditors. At the term of the superior court, in September, 1830, the petitioner and Edmund Lockwood, one of the respondents, appeared and were fully heard. The other respondents suffered a default. It was shown, in evidence, that the only debt due from the petitioner to Lockwood, was that upon which the petitioner was then confined in prison, which arose upon a judgment in a suit brought by Lockwood against him for seducing Lockwood’s daughter: (a) and that the debts due to two other respondents…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
The respondent, Lockwood, claims, that as against him, the petitioner was not entitled to relief: that the statute was intended for the relief of honest, industrious persons, who possess a good character, and who have become indebted by contracts, and not by misconduct.
The statute enacts, that if it shall appear, that the petitioner had a fair character for probity and industry, and is not justly chargeable with idleness or mismanagement in his or her affairs, and has become insolvent, and has not conveyed any of his estate to defraud his or her creditors, he shall be deemed and adjudged an…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Barstow v. AdamsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1805
3Cited by3 opinions
- Richmond v. City of NorwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- State v. BarrettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- State v. GarrandOregon Supreme Court · 1874