Starr v. Henshaw

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Starr v. Henshaw

1 Root 242

DecidedJanuary 15, 1791

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Root 242 (Starr v. Henshaw) 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

Starr v. Henshaw, 1 Root 242 (Colo. 1791).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

Duplicity must be specially pointed out by the demurrer, or it will not hold. But here is no duplicity. It is not double nor inconsistent, to ask for the interest upon the judgment, or to enforce the reasonableness of having it by any agreement of the party or acts of assembly, or other reasonable cause. As the claim of interest was grounded upon the agreement of the defendant, indorsed upon the execution in manner aforesaid, and upon an act of assembly, which is a matter of record, the court had no difficulty in giving judgment for the interest with the principal.

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

By the Court.

Duplicity must be specially pointed out by the demurrer, or it will not hold. But here is no duplicity. It is not double nor inconsistent, to ask for the interest upon the judgment, or to enforce the reasonableness of having it by any agreement of the party or acts of assembly, or other reasonable cause. As the claim of interest was grounded upon the agreement of the defendant, indorsed upon the execution in manner aforesaid, and upon an act of assembly, which is a matter of record, the court had no difficulty in giving judgment for the interest with the principal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Root 242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/starr-v-henshaw-conn-1791.