Hitchcock v. Page
1 Root 293
Opinion
Judgment — Manifest error. As to the first exception in error, the judgment does answer the issue and more which is surplusage. As to the second exception, the declaration is clearly bad, for want of consideration and for want of certainty — and the want of a consideration in an action upon a parol promise, is not aided by the finding of the justice, or by verdict of a jury; for as it is not alleged, it need not be proved on the trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hitchcock v. Page, 1 Root 293 (Colo. 1791).
1 Root 293 (Hitchcock v. Page) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Kean v. Mitchell
13 Mich. 207 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1865)