Brackett v. Norton
Supreme Court of Connecticut
In this action, the plaintiff, an attorney at law in the state of New-York, sought to recover for services rendered by him, in that capacity, to the defendant, in that state.
Read the full summary
In this action, the plaintiff, an attorney at law in the state of New-York, sought to recover for services rendered by him, in that capacity, to the defendant, in that state. The cause was tried at Litchfield, February term, 1822, before Chapman, J. The claim of the plaintiff consisted of two bills of costs; one of which arose in prosecuting to judgment a suit in the supreme court of the state of New-York, on a note in favour of the present defendant against William Beekman, jun. of Otsego county; the other, in prosecuting, in the same court, a suit in favour of the defendant, against James…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
The general question, in the case, is, whether the law implies a contract, that the defendant shall pay the plaintiff for the services performed by him; and the motion for new trial, is founded on the supposed incorrectness of the charge given to the jury.
The services of the defendant having been rendered in the state of New-York, under a contract made in that state, their laws are the standard, by which the case must be determined. Although the charge of the judge, contains a construction of these laws, and a direction to the jury, in what light they are to be regarded; yet,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Smith and Others v. Carrington and OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1807
- Town of Hebron v. Town of MarlboroughSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1816
3Cited by19 opinions
- Brush v. ScribnerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Weinhouse v. CroninSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1896
- Foster v. WileyMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- Hudson v. Von HammCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Hempstead v. ReedSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1827
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.