Kimball v. Hutchins
Supreme Court of Connecticut
THIS was an action of ejectment, tried, on the general issue, at Windham, January term, 1820, before Brainard, J. The plaintiffs claimed title as heirs of their father, Asa Kim-hall, deceased.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of ejectment, tried, on the general issue, at Windham, January term, 1820, before Brainard, J. The plaintiffs claimed title as heirs of their father, Asa Kim-hall, deceased. In support of his title, they offered in evidence, a deed of the land in question, from Joseph Weeks to ■him, dated December 11th, 1815 ; to which was annexed the following condition : “ The condition of this deed is such, that whereas I am indebted to said Kimball, by note of even date with these presents, in the sum of 2000 dollars, payable in two years from date, Avith interest; if I shall pay said…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
The deed of Weeks to Kimball, was without consideration, and, in the strictest sense, voluntary. It purported to have been given for the consideration of 2000 dollars, although nothing was paid or secured, and to be a mortgage collateral to a note of 2000 dollars, payable in two years, with interest, when no such note had been executed. The sum of fifteen hundred dollars, said to have been advanced; on a subsequent day, after the refusal of the deed by Kim-ball, and which, if of any effect, proved him to be an absolute purchaser of the land, was in contravention of the deed, and…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Alden v. TrubeeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1877
- Hurley v. OslerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1876
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. v. PerezConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Doolittle v. LymanSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1860
- Swift v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831