Burritt v. Belfy
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Assumpsit for use and occupation of real estate; brought to the City Court of the city of Watorbury. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice that he should give in evidence as a bar a judgment rendered by a justice of the peace between the same parties in a later suit for another month’s rent. Facts found and judgment rendered (Cowell, J.,') for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for use and occupation of real estate; brought to the City Court of the city of Watorbury. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice that he should give in evidence as a bar a judgment rendered by a justice of the peace between the same parties in a later suit for another month’s rent. Facts found and judgment rendered (Cowell, J.,') for the plaintiff. Motion in error by the defendant to the Superior Court, which court (Culver, J.,) affirmed the judgment. The defendant then brought the record before this court by a motion in error. The case is fully stated in the opinion.
1Dissent
Williams, C. J.,
in Ids dissenting opinion did not attack the principle referred to, but thought the court ought to lift the veil that concealed the real parties, and that the claims of these minor legatees ought to be considered as a distinct cause of action.
From the numerous cases that support the principle contended for we cite the following:—Lane v. Cook, 3 Day, 255; Bunnel v. Pinto, 2 Conn., 431; Avery v. Fitch, 4 id., 362; Simes v. Zane, 24 Penn. St. R., 242; Logan v. Caffrey, 30 id., 196; Reformed Dutch Church of Westfield v. Brown, 54 Barb., 191; Hopf v. Myers, 42 id., 270; Secor v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bendernagle v. CocksNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Guernsey v. CarverNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of Westfield v. BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1869
- Colvin & Van Patten v. CorwinNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Willard v. SperryNew York Supreme Court · 1819
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.