Buell v. Cook
Supreme Court of Connecticut
A new trial having been granted, pursuant to the decision of this Court, 4 Conn. Rep. 238, 245, the cause was tried again, at Litchfield, August term, 1822, before Peters J. The plaintiff abandoned the first count.
Read the full summary
A new trial having been granted, pursuant to the decision of this Court, 4 Conn. Rep. 238, 245, the cause was tried again, at Litchfield, August term, 1822, before Peters J. The plaintiff abandoned the first count. In support of the second, he offered parol testimony to prove, that after the 1st of December, 1817, and before the commencement of this suit, the defendant acknowledged, that he had hired the county-house, of the plaintiff, and occupied it from the 1st of December, 1817, to the 10th of April, 1818, and agreed to pay therefor the sum of 250 dollars. It was admitted, by the parties,…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
The declaration avers, that the defendant used and occupied the premises in question, by the sufferance and permission of the plaintiff, for which he is justly indebted in the sum of 250 dollars. A written agreement for a lease, provided a majority of the county court should agree thereto, was outstanding in the hands of the plaintiff at the time of the aforesaid occupation, covering the period for which the suit was brought ; to which agreement the court never assented.
In support of his declaration, the plaintiff offered to prove the defendant’s acknowledgment, that he had…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McFadin v. RippeySupreme Court of Missouri · 1844