Huntington v. Winchell
This text of 8 Conn. 45 (Huntington v. Winchell) 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.
Opinions
The question in this case was decided in the court below in conformity to what was understood to have been a previous decision on the circuit. I am satisfied, that the evidence ought to have been admitted. The excess was very trifling ; and the case seems peculiarly to require the application of the maxim—“De minibus non curat lex.” And even had the excess been at all important in point of amount, the entire levy ought not, on that account, to have been avoided ; as the debtor, if aggrieved, in such case, might obtain redress, by application to a court of chancery.
I would advise a new trial.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
8 Conn. 45, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/huntington-v-winchell-conn-1830.