Champlin v. Tilley

3 Day 303
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut·Decided April 15, 1809·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

The book must go to the jury, as it has been proved, and indeed conceded, that James Tilley made a few entries in it. The jury are to decide Whether the book, as it is, amounts to any proof of partnership.

The jury found a verdict for the defendant.

His counsel then moved, that judgment should be entered up for both defendants, though one of them had been defaulted.

The Court said, this was the correct mode of pro-seeding; for if the jury had found, that one defendant assumed and promised, and the other did not. iudsr- . , , ,. , ’ J b ment must have been entered up for both, the declaration being iounded on a joint promise only.

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

Champlin v. Tilley, 3 Day 303 (circtdct 1809).

3 Day 303 (Champlin v. Tilley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McDonald v. Cole
32 S.E. 1033 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1899)
Mitchell v. Woodward
16 Del. 311 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1897)
Cotton v. Ward
45 Ala. 359 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1871)
Litchfield Bank v. Church
29 Conn. 137 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1860)
West Winsted Savings Bank & Building Ass'n v. Ford
27 Conn. 282 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1858)
Hobart v. Connecticut Turnpike Co.
15 Conn. 145 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1842)
Borden v. Borden
5 Mass. 67 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1809)