Burk v. Phips

1 Root 487
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided January 15, 1793·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Motion in arrest adjudged sufficient — 1st. Therei is no averment in tbe declaration that tbe plaintiff is a feme sole, or but that said Edward’s father is living. 2d. It doth not appear that she was guardian or any way entitled to tbe services of said boy; that as mother she is not, which differs the case from that of a father’s commencing tbe action, for be is tbe natural guardian of bis minor children, and entitled to their services.

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

Burk v. Phips, 1 Root 487 (Colo. 1793).

1 Root 487 (Burk v. Phips) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cross v. Barber
15 A. 69 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1888)
Ballard v. St. Albans Advertiser Co.
52 Vt. 325 (Supreme Court of Vermont, 1880)
Matthewson v. Perry
37 Conn. 435 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1870)
Selden's Appeal from Probate
31 Conn. 548 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1863)
Kline v. Beebe
6 Conn. 494 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1827)