Bissell v. Spencer
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. This case having been brought before this Court, on motion in error, by the defendant below, and having been argued and submitted for decision; it appeared, that there was no assignment of errors, except the following: “The said Bissell claiming that the declaration of the plaintiff in said cause is insufficient in law, and that the superior court erred and mistook the law in rendering judgment against him, as aforesaid, in this, viz. that the said declaration is…
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. This case having been brought before this Court, on motion in error, by the defendant below, and having been argued and submitted for decision; it appeared, that there was no assignment of errors, except the following: “The said Bissell claiming that the declaration of the plaintiff in said cause is insufficient in law, and that the superior court erred and mistook the law in rendering judgment against him, as aforesaid, in this, viz. that the said declaration is insufficient as aforesaid.” The question was thereupon raised, by the Judges, in consultation, whether they could proceed…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam,(a) that the motion in error be remanded to the superior court, with liberty to the plaintiff in error to make a special assignment of errors, and to re-argue the case before this court, upon such terms as the superior court may impose.
Motion in error remanded.
Present Hosmer, Ch. J. and Daggett and Williams, Js.
2Cited by4 opinions
- Lippincott v. Shaw Carriage Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1885
- McLoud v. SelbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1835
- Tandy v. RowellSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1874
- Rochester v. RobertsSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1852