Andrews v. Ives
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This was an action of assumpsit,brought by Ives against Andrews. The declaration was as follows : “ That the defendant, in and by a certain writing or note, under his hand, by him well executed, dated the 24th day of January, 1818^ promised the plaintiffto pay to him, one year from the date of said note, the sum of 22 dollars, for the support of his mother until the 14th day of December next, on condition the said Ives frees the defendant from all expense ; as by…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This was an action of assumpsit,brought by Ives against Andrews. The declaration was as follows : “ That the defendant, in and by a certain writing or note, under his hand, by him well executed, dated the 24th day of January, 1818^ promised the plaintiffto pay to him, one year from the date of said note, the sum of 22 dollars, for the support of his mother until the 14th day of December next, on condition the said Ives frees the defendant from all expense ; as by said writing or note, ready in court to be shewn, appears. Now, the plaintiff further says, that the defendant, his…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch.J.
The plaintiff’s action is essentially on a special agreement, performed on his part; and so it appears from the declaration. The objection that it was nudum pac-not been supported. The maintenance of the defendant’s mother was on his request; and whether he was, or was not, obliged to support her, the loss sustained by the plaintiff, was a sufficient consideration. Mallory v. Lane, Cro. Jac. 342. Foster v. Scarlet, Cro. Eliz. 70. Preston v. Tooley, Cro. Eliz. 74. Rippon v. Norton, Cro. Eliz. 881. Webb’s case, 4 Leon. 110.
The other Judges were of the same opinion.
Judgment to be…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Wolford v. PowersIndiana Supreme Court · 1882
- Barron v. VandvertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Herrendeen v. WittNew York Supreme Court · 1888
- Herendeen v. DewittNew York Supreme Court · 1888