Cook v. Mix
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Nathaniel Cook and Benjamin T. Cook, executors of Ephraim Cook, deceased, against Mindwell Mix, on a promissory note, given by her, to said Ephraim Cook, as administrator of the estate of Joseph Hull, deceased. The note was for fifty dollars, dated June 1st, 1820, and payable in six months from the date.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit, brought by Nathaniel Cook and Benjamin T. Cook, executors of Ephraim Cook, deceased, against Mindwell Mix, on a promissory note, given by her, to said Ephraim Cook, as administrator of the estate of Joseph Hull, deceased. The note was for fifty dollars, dated June 1st, 1820, and payable in six months from the date. The cause was tried at New-Haven, October term, 1835, before Williams, Ch. J. The note mentioned in the declaration being introduced in evidence, it appeared, that there was endorsed thereon the sum of 6 dollars, 25 cents. And there was, on the face…
1Opinion of the CourtBissell, J.
The decision of the judge on the circuit, rejecting the testimony of Mrs. Parker, is urged as one reason why the rule, in this case, should be made absolute.
The only question, on this branch of the case, is, whether the witness offered had an interest in the event of the suit. And whether she had such an interest, was a question of fact, to be determined on the evidence before the court. It is claimed, in the first place, that the judge mistook the law, in not submitting this question to the jury: And this strange claim has been gravely urged before this court. It is sufficient to observe,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Spalding v. VandercookNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Lawrence v. Stonington BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1827
- Taft v. Inhabitants of MontagueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Inhabitants of Barkhamsted v. CaseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1825
- Miller v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1818
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ReaganMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1900
- Pulsifer v. HotchkissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1837
- Cairns v. MooneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1890
- Scantlin v. AllisonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
- Dahl v. StakkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.