Cowles v. Marshall

Connecticut Superior Court

Cowles v. Marshall

2 Kirby 39, 1 Conn. Super. Ct. 39

DecidedSeptember 15, 1788

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Kirby 39 (Cowles v. Marshall) 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

Cowles v. Marshall, 2 Kirby 39, 1 Conn. Super. Ct. 39 (Colo. Ct. App. 1788).

Pincite

Opinion

By the whole Court:

If the facts stated in the petition can be supported by legal proof the petitioner hath an adequate remedy at law.—He doth not pray for the admission of any evidence for the disclosure of facts which he could not have the benefit of, in a trial at law, therefore, he is not entitled to [41]*41relief in a court of equity which would deprive the opposite party of the privilege of a trial by jury, and of appeal, if aggrieved by the judgement.

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

By the whole Court:

If the facts stated in the petition can be supported by legal proof the petitioner hath an adequate remedy at law.—He doth not pray for the admission of any evidence for the disclosure of facts which he could not have the benefit of, in a trial at law, therefore, he is not entitled to [41]*41relief in a court of equity which would deprive the opposite party of the privilege of a trial by jury, and of appeal, if aggrieved by the judgement.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Kirby 39, 1 Conn. Super. Ct. 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cowles-v-marshall-connsuperct-1788.