Pride v. Peters

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Pride v. Peters

1 Root 331

DecidedSeptember 15, 1791

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Root 331 (Pride v. Peters) 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

Pride v. Peters, 1 Root 331 (Colo. 1791).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment — That the defendant did not assume and promise. It is clear that neither the vessel when, sold, or the money when received for it, were the plaintiff’s — and if the plaintiff has any remedy it must be by a special action of the case, founded upon the particular agreement.

Colonel Halsey and said Clark were offered as witnesses, and it appearing that they had similar claims against the defendant, depending on the same facts, were not admitted.

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

Judgment — That the defendant did not assume and promise. It is clear that neither the vessel when, sold, or the money when received for it, were the plaintiff’s — and if the plaintiff has any remedy it must be by a special action of the case, founded upon the particular agreement.

Colonel Halsey and said Clark were offered as witnesses, and it appearing that they had similar claims against the defendant, depending on the same facts, were not admitted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Root 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pride-v-peters-conn-1791.