Branch v. Riley

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Branch v. Riley

1 Root 541

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided March 15, 1793·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

This testimony cannot be received. The defendant by being defaulted has admitted the plaintiff’s right of action, and no sufficient excuse is assigned why he cannot produce said writing; its being lost may be the effect of his own negligence and not of any inevitable accident. Besides, if he has such a writing, his proper remedy is by action upon if. See Phillips v. Halsey, New London, March Term, A. D. 1790.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

By the Court.

This testimony cannot be received. The defendant by being defaulted has admitted the plaintiff’s right of action, and no sufficient excuse is assigned why he cannot produce said writing; its being lost may be the effect of his own negligence and not of any inevitable accident. Besides, if he has such a writing, his proper remedy is by action upon if. See Phillips v. Halsey, New London, March Term, A. D. 1790.

Branch v. Riley, 1 Root 541 (Colo. 1793).

Pincite

1 Root 541 (Branch v. Riley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related