Ferriss v. Ferriss

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Ferriss v. Ferriss

1 Root 365

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedJanuary 15, 1792

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 Root 365 (Ferriss v. Ferriss) 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.

Bluebook

Ferriss v. Ferriss, 1 Root 365 (Colo. 1792).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment — That the plea in bar is insufficient. There are certain cases in which trover is the proper action; there are others in which the action of trespass is the proper remedy; there are others in which either trover or trespass may be brought indifferently; and a recovery in one will be a bar to the other, which is this case. All this was open to the legislature, when they enacted a limitation to actions of trespass, and left the action of trover unrestrained; and this court cannot alter the law.

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

Judgment — That the plea in bar is insufficient. There are certain cases in which trover is the proper action; there are others in which the action of trespass is the proper remedy; there are others in which either trover or trespass may be brought indifferently; and a recovery in one will be a bar to the other, which is this case. All this was open to the legislature, when they enacted a limitation to actions of trespass, and left the action of trover unrestrained; and this court cannot alter the law.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Root 365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferriss-v-ferriss-conn-1792.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack