Hinman v. Stiles
This text of 1 Kirby 10 (Hinman v. Stiles) 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.
Opinions
On examination of two of tbe jurors, it appears tbat tbe jury found tbe sum of £40 credited to tbe defendant, wbicb was equal to the sum charged for tbe land, and wbicb by agreement of tbe parties was to be in payment for tbe land; and tbe small sums of interest included in tbe verdict, were not, on trial, objected to by tbe defendant: And one witness testified, tbat tbey were charged by consent of tbe defendant. There were other proper boolc-debt articles in tbe account, to a large amount, to wbicb there was no objection; and tbe balance would have been tbe same, if tbe land, and sum credited for it, bad not been entered on tbe book: Therefore tbe motion in arrest is insufficient.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1 Kirby 10, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hinman-v-stiles-connsuperct-1786.