Sharp v. Curtiss
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This action was originally brought by Alfred D. Curtiss against Philander Sharp, before a justice of the peace, and thence, by appeal, came before the county court. There were two counts in the declaration.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This action was originally brought by Alfred D. Curtiss against Philander Sharp, before a justice of the peace, and thence, by appeal, came before the county court. There were two counts in the declaration. In the first, the defendant was required to answer unto the plaintiff in an action brought on a certain statute law of this state, entitled, “ An Act concerning Fences and Common Fields,” whereupon the plaintiff declared, That he and the defendant being the adjoining proprietors of certain tracts of land, situated in Newtown, the defendant has heretofore neglected and refused to…
1Opinion of the CourtWaite, J.
The plaintiff in error, in the first place, insists, that the declaration is insufficient, for several reasons.
1. It is said, the form of the action is wrong. The statute gives an action on the case, whereas this is an action on the statute. Without doubt, where a statute provides a remedy, and prescribes the form of action, the remedy must be sought in the manner prescribed. But what is this but an action on the case, brought upon the very case arising out of the provisions of the statute ? The term action on the case comprehends a great variety of suits; and this is but one species. Such an…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- M'lanahan v. the Universal Insurance CompanySupreme Court of the United States · 1828
3Cited by4 opinions
- Ziman v. WhitleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Aaronson v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- H. J. Jaeger Research Laboratories, Inc. v. Radio Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1937
- Barnum's Appeal from ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1865