Comes v. Prior

Connecticut Superior Court

Comes v. Prior

1 Kirby 395

DecidedMarch 15, 1788

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Kirby 395 (Comes v. Prior) 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

Comes v. Prior, 1 Kirby 395 (Colo. Ct. App. 1788).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

That the first suit being only an action of trespass, for the recovery of damages, and this being an action for the recovery of the land, is of a higher nature: — - Therefore, the judgment pleaded is not a bar to this suit; for the party may now be able to produce further evidence in support of his title, than was produced on the former [396]*396trial. And this is admissible by the uniform practice of the courts of law in this state, as well as in England, in favor of estates of inheritance. See Bac. Abrid. 119.

So judgment was for the plaintiff.

Note.— Judge Ellsworth excused himself in this case.

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

By the Court.

That the first suit being only an action of trespass, for the recovery of damages, and this being an action for the recovery of the land, is of a higher nature: — - Therefore, the judgment pleaded is not a bar to this suit; for the party may now be able to produce further evidence in support of his title, than was produced on the former [396]*396trial. And this is admissible by the uniform practice of the courts of law in this state, as well as in England, in favor of estates of inheritance. See Bac. Abrid. 119.

So judgment was for the plaintiff.

Note.— Judge Ellsworth excused himself in this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Kirby 395, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/comes-v-prior-connsuperct-1788.