Chapel v. Congdon
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Debt on a bond, under St. 1785, c. 66. The case was tried before Wilde J. It appeared, that on September 14th, 1833, the plaintiff complained to Thomas A. Gold, Esq., setting forth that she was pregnant with a child, which, if born alive, would be a bastard, and accused the defendant, William H. Congdon, of being the father of the child ; that Congdon was arrested and brought before Mr. Gold, on September 16th, 1833, and was ordered to give bond, with sufficient sureties, in…
Read the full summary
Debt on a bond, under St. 1785, c. 66. The case was tried before Wilde J. It appeared, that on September 14th, 1833, the plaintiff complained to Thomas A. Gold, Esq., setting forth that she was pregnant with a child, which, if born alive, would be a bastard, and accused the defendant, William H. Congdon, of being the father of the child ; that Congdon was arrested and brought before Mr. Gold, on September 16th, 1833, and was ordered to give bond, with sufficient sureties, in the sum of $200, for his appearance at the Court of Common Pleas next to be held at Lenox, for the county of Berkshire,…
1Opinion of the Court
Putnam J.
delivered the opinion of the Court. A mistake, which is obvious to all, has beers made by the magistrate in the drought of the bond. If it be in matter of substance, it will be fatal; if it be only redundant matter of description, which is not necessary to be literally proved, the claim may be supported, if enough remains to establish the identity. The rule is well stated in 3 Stark, on Evid. 1529. “ It is a most general rule, that no allegation which is descriptive of the identity of that which is legally essential to the claim or charge, can ever be rejected.” Now the thing which…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Colburn v. DownesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813