Powers v. Mulvey
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Actioh for an assault; brought to the District Court of Waterbury, and tried to the court before Bradsireet, J. Facts found, and judgment rendered for the plaintiff. Appeal by defendant to the Superior Court, which court' (Stoddard, J".) affirmed the decision. The defendant appealed from that judgment to this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtLoomis, J.
Under the Practice Act the right to recover rests upon, and is limited, by the facts alleged in the complaint. In this case the defendant is only charged with assaulting and beating the plaintiff. False imprisonment, therefore, not being alleged, is to be excluded as a ground for recovery. The facts, alleged were not denied by the defendant, but by way of justification he made answer, in substance, that he was a constable’, and that in the execution of his office he did the acts complained of, using no more force than was necessary. The plaintiff, in his reply, might have demurred to this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Booth v. BoothSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1829
3Cited by10 opinions
- Leary v. Citizens & Manufacturers National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- Donovan v. Hartford Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
- Todd v. MunsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1886
- Berman v. KlingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
- Whiting v. KoepkeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1898
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.