Clark v. Moses

Connecticut Superior Court

Clark v. Moses

1 Kirby 143

DecidedSeptember 15, 1786

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Kirby 143 (Clark v. Moses) 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

Clark v. Moses, 1 Kirby 143 (Colo. Ct. App. 1786).

Pincite

Opinion

By the whole Court.

Nothing appears from the record, but that substantial justice is done between the parties, although the entry is informal. The defendant’s plea, in fact, was insufficient; because it did not set forth the principal pum loaned, nor the sum included in the note for interest and forbearance; so that it might appear whether the contract was usurious or not. It also appears from the record, that the justice heard the witnesses, and on consideration of the-case, gave judgment for the plaintiff;— from whence it may be concluded, that he found the defendant’s plea not only insufficient in law, but unsupported by evidence.

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

By the whole Court.

Nothing appears from the record, but that substantial justice is done between the parties, although the entry is informal. The defendant’s plea, in fact, was insufficient; because it did not set forth the principal pum loaned, nor the sum included in the note for interest and forbearance; so that it might appear whether the contract was usurious or not. It also appears from the record, that the justice heard the witnesses, and on consideration of the-case, gave judgment for the plaintiff;— from whence it may be concluded, that he found the defendant’s plea not only insufficient in law, but unsupported by evidence.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Kirby 143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clark-v-moses-connsuperct-1786.