Church v. Clark
This text of 1 Root 303 (Church v. Clark) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment of the County Court affirmed — ETot because the statute is any bar to this action; for every officer, who has collected money on an execution is liable to pay it over. But the demurrer runs back to the declaration; and by that it appears, that this money was collected and received as an officer, who- is not bound to carry it to- the creditor. The law provides no pay for his travel; the law therefore does not raise a promise, in such case, to pay until a demand is ma.de, and no special demand is laid in the declaration, and for this fault in the declaration, the judgment was affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Root 303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/church-v-clark-conn-1791.