Triplett v. Micou
Supreme Court of Virginia
John Micou, as agent for, and suing for the benefit of, Judith Matthews, brought a suit in Henrico superior court, against Daniel and Philip Triplett, on a bond executed by them in the penalty of g 360, and conditioned to pay half that sum, and to return two negro men, which had been hired, well-clothed. The declaration in its commei1cemen^ describes the action to be « a plea of breach of covenant.”
Read the full summary
John Micou, as agent for, and suing for the benefit of, Judith Matthews, brought a suit in Henrico superior court, against Daniel and Philip Triplett, on a bond executed by them in the penalty of g 360, and conditioned to pay half that sum, and to return two negro men, which had been hired, well-clothed. The declaration in its commei1cemen^ describes the action to be « a plea of breach of covenant.” It then states that the said Tripletts, by their writing obligatory, covenanted and agreed, for the hire of two negro men, to pay to the said Micou g 360, to be discharged by g 180, and to return…
1Opinion of the Court
January 18.
Judge Brooke,
delivered the opinion of the court: *
The declaration in this case alleges, that both of the defendants covenanted to pay the money and return the negroes weli-clothed. The suit abated, as to one of the de~ fendants, and the appearance bail of the other defendant pleaded payment; to which there was a general replication. The verdict finds, that the surviving defendant bath not paid the debt in the declaration mentioned.
Passing by the objection, that the verdict does not respond to the charge for clothing, (it being most beneficial to the appellant,) the court is of…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Toulmin v. LesesneSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
- Davis' Adm'rs v. MeadSupreme Court of Virginia · 1856