Weed v. Bishop
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. The admission of illegal evidence, which might have influence! the triers in their decision, is ground of error, though it may not appear, that it had in fact, any influence. An action of book debt, pending in the superior court, was referred to auditors. An award was made, and returned to court and accepted.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. The admission of illegal evidence, which might have influence! the triers in their decision, is ground of error, though it may not appear, that it had in fact, any influence. An action of book debt, pending in the superior court, was referred to auditors. An award was made, and returned to court and accepted. A remonstrance was filed, by the defendants, (plaintiffs in error,) to the acceptance of the report, wherein it appeared, that before the auditors, the plaintiff (defendants in error) offered in evidence his book, and that it thereby appeared, that about 50 dollars of the…
1Opinion of the CourtDaggett, J.
It is understood that the judge at the circuit ruled both the points in the case in favour of the plaintiff. As the question whether such a clause in a will can revive a debt, against which the statute of limitations has run, is to be raised, and argued, and definitively settled, in the case of Peck v. Botsford, (a), to be decided this term, I forbear now to express an opinion upon it, especially as the other point arising on this record is sufficient, in my opinion, to reverse the judgment. That point only, therefore, will be considered.
Is the plaintiff in an action of debt by book a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bryan v. JacksonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
3Cited by6 opinions
- Ely v. ParsonsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1886
- Terill v. BeecherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1832
- Williams Ground Services, Inc. v. JordanConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
- Morse v. CongdonMichigan Supreme Court · 1855
- Lewis v. KennedySupreme Court of Iowa · 1851
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.