Humiston v. Smith
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action on the case. The declaration contained three counts.' The first two were for a false and fraudulent warranty of a horse; and the other for a false and fraudulent representation respecting his,soundness.
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case. The declaration contained three counts.' The first two were for a false and fraudulent warranty of a horse; and the other for a false and fraudulent representation respecting his,soundness. The cause was brought to the county court, for the county of New Haven, and tried at the March term, 1851, when the plaintiff obtained a verdict for twenty-three dollars damages, and the court taxed and allowed the plaintiff, the sum of sixty-one dollars and sixty-two cents, costs of suit. The defendant thereupon filed his motion in error, and removed the cause to the…
1Opinion of the CourtWaite, J.
The statute provides, that in all actions of trespass and trespass on the case, tried in the county or superior court, if the damages found by a verdict of the jury, or otherwise, shall not exceed thirty-five dollars, the plaintiff shall recover no more costs than damages, unless the title of land, the right of way, or the use of water, is in question. Statutes, title I., chap. 12, sec. 152.
The question arising upon the present record, is, whether the action is trespass on the case, within the fair intendment of that statute. If it be, it is not denied but that the plaintiff is precluded from…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hobbs v. SmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Morehouse v. NorthropSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1866
- Mead v. RaymondMichigan Supreme Court · 1883