Bailey v. Bussing
Supreme Court of Connecticut
A new trial having been refused in this case, (ante, Vol. 28, p. 455,) the superior court rendered judgment for the plaintiffs, upon which the defendant filed a motion in error and brought the record before this court for revision, assigning as error the insufficiency of the declaration.
Read the full summary
A new trial having been refused in this case, (ante, Vol. 28, p. 455,) the superior court rendered judgment for the plaintiffs, upon which the defendant filed a motion in error and brought the record before this court for revision, assigning as error the insufficiency of the declaration. The declaration was as follows: — Then and there to answer unto, &c., executors of the last will and testament of Aaron Turner, late of, &c., deceased, in a plea of the case, whereupon the plaintiffs, as said executors, declare and say that, on &c., said Aaron Turner, then in full life, and the defendant and…
1Opinion of the CourtStorrs, C. J.
The action in the case brought before us by this motion in error being founded on a simple contract, it was plainly necessary that the declaration should disclose facts from which it would appear that there was a legal consideration for the promise of the defendant which is relied on. In our opinion this declaration, for the want of any averment showing such facts, is insufficient. After stating a recovery of a judgment by Haight and his wife against the plaintiffs’ testator and the defendant and H. Whitlock, and its amount, and a payment by said testator of a part thereof upon the execution…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Nickerson v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1878
- Pipp v. ReynoldsMichigan Supreme Court · 1870
- McCune v. Norwich City Gas Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1862
- O'Keefe v. National Folding Box & Paper Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
- Schlitz v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.