Nichols v. Standish
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Debt on a replevin bond; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried before Sail, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by the defendants. The case is fully stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtHoyey, J.
This was an action upon a replevin bond for the sum of one thousand dollars, given by the defendant *322Standish as principal and the defendant Reynolds as surety, in a suit in which Standish was plaintiff, and the present plaintiff was defendant. The writ of replevin was issued upon the application and affidavit of Standish, stating the true and just value of the property to be replevied, and upon the security of the bond in suit, and was in all respects regular and in accordance with the requirements of the statute, except that the affidavit was not subscribed by the affiant. Notwithstanding…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Persse v. WatrousSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- Moors v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1807
- Bigelow v. ComegysOhio Supreme Court · 1855
- McDermott v. IsbellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1854
- Rosen v. FischelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- D'Andrea v. RendeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
- Douglass v. UnmackSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
- Matthai v. CapenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895