¶1The declaration is insufficient; it gives no rule of damages. The orders which the defendant is challenged to account for being no otherwise described than as drawn on the one shilling tax “and as it doth not appear by whom or by what authority they were drawn, or on which of the one shilling taxes, as divers have been granted and were of different values, there is no rule given to the court by which to ascertain their value, or assess damages for not redelivering or otherwise accounting for them.
1 Kirby 90
Grant v. Jackson
Decided August 15, 1786
Connecticut Superior Court · decided 1786-08-15
Assumpsit. The declaration is: “ That on the 23d day of September, 1784, the defendant received of the plaintiff £29 6s. 8d. in orders on the one shilling tax; which orders the defendánt then and there promised to return to the plaintiff by the 1st day of July then next, or to- account with the plaintiff for said orders in some other way, by said time; as appears by a writing under the defendant’s hand, of the date above, ready in court to be produced.” \ To this declaration…
Decided 1786-08-15