Burden v. Skinner

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut

Burden v. Skinner

3 Day 126

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut

DecidedJune 15, 1808

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Day 126 (Burden v. Skinner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burden v. Skinner, 3 Day 126 (circtdct 1808).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Reeve and Edmond,

Js. dissenting. A parol agreement cannot be given in evidence to discharge a breach of a written contract; but it may be given in evidence to show that there never was a breach. In this case, the evidence offered would serve [131]*131:o show, that in consequence of the license and consent of the father, there never was a breach; and is, therefore, proper and pertinent to the issue, and ought to have been admitted.

New trial to be granted.

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

By the Court,

Reeve and Edmond,

Js. dissenting. A parol agreement cannot be given in evidence to discharge a breach of a written contract; but it may be given in evidence to show that there never was a breach. In this case, the evidence offered would serve [131]*131:o show, that in consequence of the license and consent of the father, there never was a breach; and is, therefore, proper and pertinent to the issue, and ought to have been admitted.

New trial to be granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Day 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burden-v-skinner-circtdct-1808.