Mason v. Mason

Connecticut Superior Court

Mason v. Mason

2 Kirby 18, 1 Conn. Super. Ct. 18

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided November 15, 1786·Published

Opinion

ACTION of account.—The defendant gave a general plea; he then took it back and agreed to the appointment of auditors. A question arose whether it would be regular to suffer a default and then move for auditors.

The Court were inclined that it would be regular, for there must be an interlocutory judgement before auditors can be appointed, which may well be on default.—

(Absentibus C.: Judge Law and Judge Sherman.)

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

ACTION of account.—The defendant gave a general plea; he then took it back and agreed to the appointment of auditors. A question arose whether it would be regular to suffer a default and then move for auditors.

The Court were inclined that it would be regular, for there must be an interlocutory judgement before auditors can be appointed, which may well be on default.—

(Absentibus C.: Judge Law and Judge Sherman.)

Mason v. Mason, 2 Kirby 18, 1 Conn. Super. Ct. 18 (Colo. Ct. App. 1786).

Pincite

2 Kirby 18 (Mason v. Mason) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.