Cheesborough v. Clark

Connecticut Superior Court

Cheesborough v. Clark

1 Root 141

DecidedSeptember 15, 1789

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Root 141 (Cheesborough v. Clark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cheesborough v. Clark, 1 Root 141 (Colo. Ct. App. 1789).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

As to the first exception such agreement between the parties is not admissible on this issue to defeat the title. By next justice, in the statute is not meant strictly the nearest, but some one in the town where the land lies. As to the third exception, there is no law that excludes a tenant from being an appraiser of land, taken on execution; and where the parties having knowingly and' understandingly agreed upon him, as in the present case, both parties knew he was tenant; they are estopped to say he is not indifferent, especially the debtor, whose tenant he was, and who chose him. Yerdict and judgment for the plaintiff.

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

By the Court.

As to the first exception such agreement between the parties is not admissible on this issue to defeat the title. By next justice, in the statute is not meant strictly the nearest, but some one in the town where the land lies. As to the third exception, there is no law that excludes a tenant from being an appraiser of land, taken on execution; and where the parties having knowingly and' understandingly agreed upon him, as in the present case, both parties knew he was tenant; they are estopped to say he is not indifferent, especially the debtor, whose tenant he was, and who chose him. Yerdict and judgment for the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Root 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cheesborough-v-clark-connsuperct-1789.