Volume 46 — Connecticut Reports

<p>Bill for a foreclosure; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. Facts found by a committee, and decree of foreclosure passed by Hovey, J. Motion in error by respondents. The case is fully stated in the opinion.</p>

<p>Bill in Equity to enjoin the respondent against prosecuting a claim for dower; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. The following facts were found by the court:—</p> <p>The respondent was married to Anan Stilson, the deceased, on the 1st of November, 1855, and the following year Florence Stilson was born, the issue of the marriage. In August, 1865, in the Superior Court for Fairfield County, the respondent was divorced from the said Anan on her petition on the ground of desertion, without any alimony being claimed or allowed. The petition stated other grounds of divorce and contained a prayer for alimony, but while the petition was pending and before any hearing thereof by the court, the parties entered into a negotiation with regard to the matter. In this negotiation Mrs. Stilson proceeded upon the ground that, although she had applied for alimony in her petition, still she was seeking therein for a divorce, and for that only, and stated that she did not want and would not take any of his property, hut thought that he ought to make some provision for Florence, their daughter. Mr. Stilson took the ground that the divorce should be granted,, if at all, for no cause casting reproach on his moral character, and that .no part of his property should be granted to Mrs. Stilson by way of alimony; and stated that, unless these points were conceded, he would make what resistance he could to her petition. These negotiations resulted in an agreement, made before the hearing of the petition, that Mr. Stilson should make no .opposition to a divorce for desertion, that he should give his note for the benefit of Florence, the daughter, for the sum of $3,000, payable when she should become eighteen years of age, with interest semi-annually, the note to be held by Cortes Merchant, the father of Mrs. Stilson, and that Mrs. Stilson was not to ask for nor receive alimony. The note was executed by Mr. Stilson and placed in the hands of an indifferent person to await the action of the court on the petition, and as soon as the divorce should be granted it was to be delivered to Mr. Merchant for the benefit of said Florence; all of which was carried into effect.</p> <p>After the divorce Mr. Stilson married another woman, and Gertrude, the present petitioner, was born, the issue of the second marriage.</p> <p>Mr. Stilson died intestate, March 15th, 1874, and during the settlement of his estate the present respondent applied to the court of probate and obtained a decree setting out her dower, from which decree an appeal was taken to the Superior Court, and pending the appeal the present petition was brought, praying for an injunction against the further prosecution of her claim for dower by the respondent.</p> <p>Upon these facts the case was reserved for the advice of this court.</p>

Proceeding under the statute with regard to intoxicating liquors, for the seizure of liquors kept with intent to sell contrary to law; brought by appeal of Mead, who assumed the defence, from the judgment of a justice- of the peac.e to the Court of Common Pleas for Fairfield County, and there tried to the jury before Be Forest, J. Yerdict for the State, and motion for a new trial by the defendant.

Action on the case, for a neglect of the defendants to supply water to hydrants of the city of Bridgeport, by reason of which the property of the plaintiffs, having taken fire, was consumed; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. The declaration contained three counts, to all of which the defendants demurred both generally and specially, as also to the whole declaration for a misjoinder of counts.

Assumpsit for money had and received; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the court on the general issue before Sail, J. The court found the following facts:— David T. Hedenberg died at Westport, in this state, in July, 1865. He was at that time indebted to the plaintiff for money lent in the sum of |150, the money having been lent him in the state of New York, in July, 1864.

Appeal, from the disallowance by commissioners on the estate of Joseph Olmstead, of a claim presented by the appellant; taken to the Superior Court in Fairfield County, and brought before this court by tho appellant by a motion in error from the judgment of tho Superior Court, (Hitchcock, J.,) and by the appellees by a motion for a new trial. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Bill for contribution and for a foreclosure; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. The following facts were found by a committee:— Maria Bouton on the 16th day of September, 1870, made a mortgage of certain real estate to the Norwalk Savings Society to secure a note of $10,000, which mortgage was duly recorded. A part of the land mortgaged was a tract in the village of Norwalk, containing four lots and a gore of land, and bounded upon a city street.

Action upon tlie statute'with regard to highways and bridges, to recover damages for an injury received by the plaintiff Della L. Hoyle by reason of a defect in a highway of the defendant town; brought to the Superior Court in New London County, and tried to the jury,'upon the general issue, with notice, before Hovey, J. The act of 1874, (now incorporated into the revision of 1875 as sec. 10, part 1, ch. 7, tit. 16,) provides that no action shall- be maintained against any…

Assumpsit for money paid out and expended; brought by appeal from a justice of the peace to the Court of Common Pleas of New London County, and tried to the court on the general issue before Mather, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by the defendant. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill in equity for an injunction against further proceedings in an action at law upon a judgment obtained against the petitioners by the respondent as administrator of the estate of one Atkinson; brought to the Superior Court in New London County.

Bill of interpleader, brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County. The respondents were Sylvester C. Dun-ham, administrator of the estate of Lydia S. Reynolds, and Ira Babcock, executor of Charles McCammon, who severally claimed the money due on a policy of insurance issued by the petitioners upon the life of said Charles McCammon.

Assumpsit against the defendant as acceptor of an order drawn on him in favor of the plaintiff; brought to the Court of Common Picas of Hartford County, and tried to the court on the general issue before McManus, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff. Motion in error by the defendant. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for rent of leased premises; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County.

Bill in equity; brought to the Superior Court in Middle-sex County. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The point decided by the court will he sufficiently understood without a statement of the facts.

Petition for an injunction; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Hartford County, and heard before Calhoun, J. Injunction granted, and motion in error by the respondents. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Tboveb for certain shares of stock-; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County, and tried to the court on the general issue before Beardsley, J. Judgment for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by both plaintiff and defendant. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Action for a libel, brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County, and tried to the jury on the general issue, with notice, before Beardsley, J. The libelous matter charged consisted of several letters written by the defendant to certain charitable societies, with regard to the management by the plaintiff of the estate of. Betsey Hanchett, in which they had an interest as legatees.

Ejectment; brought to the Superior Court in Middlesex County. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. j

Action on the case for fraud; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County, and tried to the court on the general issue. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Trespass for the taking of personal property, with a'count in trover; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County. General issue, with notice, facts found, and case reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for money lent and advanced; brought to the Superior Court in Middlesex County.

Replevin, for sundry articles of personal property claimed by the plaintiff as a mortgagee of the Connecticut Yalley Railroad Company; brought by the treasurer of the state as trustee for the bondholders secured by the mortgage. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice that he had attached the property as an officer and held it as such when it was taken from him upon the replevin, and demanded its return.

Bill in Equity for an account, and for the payment to the petitioners of money in the respondent’s hands as a trustee; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County. Facts found by a committee, and the case reserved upon the facts found for the advice of this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill for the foreclosure of a mortgage; brought to the Superior Court in Litchfield County. The following facts were found by a committee upon the bill and answer: On the 6th day of March, 1874, Samuel L. Gager, of the town of Sharon, resigned the office of treasurer of the town, which he had held by successive elections since October, 1872; and at the time of his resignation he was a defaulter in his office to the amount, as afterwards ascertained, of $2,428.12.

Trespass for taking and carrying away a quantity of hay belonging to the plaintiff; brought to the Superior Court in Litchfield County. The case was tried to the court, before Sanford, J., on the plea of the general issue, with notice that the hay was taken by attachment as the property of one Dwight W. Johnson.

Qui tam complaint against tlie defendant as a grandjuror for a refusal to make complaint of a breach of the peace; brought upon the 23d section of the 12th chapter of the statute with regard to “crimes and criminal prosecutions.” The case was brought originally before a justice of the peace, and appealed by the plaintiff to the District Court for Litchfield County, and was by that court reserved, upon a finding* of the facts, for the advice of this court.

Bill for a foreclosure; brought to the Superior Court in Litchfield County. The following facts were found by tho court: Riley Rexford in 1855 was tho owner of the land in question, a farm in the town of Cornwall, and made a mortgage of the same to one Ives, and in the year 1858 another mortgage to one Pratt, and afterwards in the same year another mortgage to one Brewster.

Action upon the statute with regard to highways and bridges, to recover for an injury from a defective highway of •the defendant town; brought originally before a justice of the peace, and appealed by the defendants to the District Court of Litchfield County, and there tried to the jury on the general issue, before Sail, J. Yerdict for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by the defendants.

Trespass qu. cl. fr:, brought to the Superior Court in Litchfield County.

Action on the case for the obstruction of a right of way through the defendant’s land; brought to the District Court of Litchfield County. The defendant suffered a default, and the case was heard in damages before Fyler, J., who fixed the same at $150. The defendant moved for a new trial for error in the rulings of the court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Petition for an injunction; brought to the Superior Court in Litchfield County, and heard before Sanford, J. Pacts found and petition dismissed, and motion in error by the petitioners. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Verdict for the appellee, and motion for a new trial by the appellants. There was also a motion in arrest of judgment, which the court overruled, and which was brought before this court by a motion in error. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Petition for advice as to the construction of a will; brought by the executor to the Superior Court in Litchfield County, and heard, upon the petition, and answers of the different respondents, before Sanford, J. Decree passed, and motion in error by Achille F. Migeon, one of the respondents. The case is -sufficiently stated in the opinion.

<p>Upon the record being read it appeared that the justice’s record of the judgment was as follows:</p>

Grandjuror’s complaint for a violation of. a by-law of the town of Milford with regard to fisheries; brought before a justice of the peace, and appealed by the defendant to the Superior Court in New Haven County. Motion by the defendant to strike the case from the docket, and reservation of the question for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Bill in Equity for an injunction; brought to the City Court of the city of Waterbury, and heard before Qowell, J. Pacts found and injunction granted, and motion in error by the respondent. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Petition to the Superior Court for advice as to the construction and effect of certain provisions of the wills of Elnathan Atwater and Margaret Atwater, under the former of which wills the petitioner was a trustee and of the latter executor. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Petition for an injunction; brought to the Superior Court. ■ Pacts found and case reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Action on the statute with regard to highways and bridges; brought to the City Court of the city of Waterbury and tried to the jury before Cowell, J. Verdict for the plaintiffs, and motions in error and for a new trial to the Superior Court, which motions were by that court reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Trespass on the case for fraud in refusing to disclose rights of action with intent to prevent their being taken by foreign attachment; brought by appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and tried to the court on the general issue before Harrison, J. On the trial the plaintiffs offered evidence to prove that on the 27th day of April, 1877, the defendant was indebted to them in the sum of #69, and that on that day…

Assumpsit; brought to the City Court of the city of Waterbury, and tried to the court, upon the general issue, with notice of a set-off, before Melds, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, denying the set-off. Motion in error by the defendant to the Superior Court, and a reservation of the case by that court for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for demurrage; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and tried to the court on the general issue, before Harrison, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the defendants, and a motion for a new trial by the plaintiff. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for supplies furnished to certain paupers claimed to belong to the defendant town; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and tried to the jury on the general issue before Harrison, J. The case is the same one in which a new trial was granted at a former term of the court (44 Conn. R., 210).

Bill to foreclose a lien for an amount assessed upon the respondent as a benefit from the construction of a city street; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County. Pacts found, and case reserved for advice. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill in Equity for tlio specific performance of a contract to convoy land; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County. Pacts found and case reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Trespass qu. cl. fr., with counts in case and assumpsit; brought to the City Court of the city of Waterbury. Special demurrer to the declaration; demurrer sustained and judgment for the defendants; motion in error to the Superior Court, and case reserved by that court for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

. Petition for the foreclosure of a builders’ lien; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and heard before Peels, J. Pacts found, a decree in favor of the petitioner passed, and a motion in error by the respondent. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit upon the common counts; brought by appeal from a justice of the peace to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County. The defendant pleaded in bar a former judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The case was tried to the court, before Harrison, J., and the following facts found: The plaintiff was a mason, and in May, 1876, contracted with the defendant, who was a builder, to do all the mason work upon five houses in the city of Meriden.

Debt upon a guaranty; brought to the Superior Court in Windham County. The following facts were found by a committee: On the 3d day of October, 1874, the plaintiff loaned to Jonathan Porter the sum of $3,000, taking a note for that sum payable to the plaintiff or order, in sixty days from date, signed by Porter, and indorsed by Abram K. Gould, David G. Aldrich and David N. Porter. The maker paid the interest on the note in advance.

Bill for a foreclosure; brought to the Superior Court in Windham County. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit; brought to the Superior Court in Windham County. Pacts found and case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit upon a promissory note; brought to the Superior Court in Windham County, and tried to the court before Culver, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff. Motion in error by the defendant. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Scire Facias upon a process of foreign attachment; brought by appeal from a justice of the peace to the Superior Court in Windham County. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Information for a violation of the act (Gen. Statutes, tit.. 20, cli. 9, sec. 60,) which forbids the keeping open between the hours of twelve o’clock Saturday night and twelve o’clock of the Sunday night next following, any place in which it is reputed that intoxicating liquors are exposed for sale; brought by appeal from a justice of the peace to the Superior Court in Fairfield County, and tried to the jury before Beardsley, J. Yerdict guilty, and motion for a new trial by…

Indictment for murder in the first degree, in the Superior Court in Fairfield County. The case was tried to the jury, on the plea of not guilty, before Carpenter and Sanford, Js.

Information for tlieft, in the Superior Court in Fairfield County; tried to the jury on the plea of not guilty before Loomis, J. Yerdict guilty, and motion for a new trial by the accused. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Indictment for rape upon a female eliild under ten years of age, in the Superior Court in Fairfield County. The prisoner pleaded not guilty, and under the statute of 1874, elected to be tried by the court, and was afterwards tried by Culver, J., and found guilty.

<p>Assumpsit, brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. ' The plaintiff held by assignment sundry claims against the estate of Noah Rusco, deceased, and sued the defendant as his executor, claiming upon the facts proved that he had made himself executor in his own wrong. The case was tried to the court on the general issue before Sovey, J., who made a special finding of the facts and rendered judgment thereon for the defendant. The plaintiff brought the case before this court by a motion in error. The points of law decided by the court will be sufficiently understood without a statement of the facts.</p>

Assumpsit on a subscription to the stock of a railroad company; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County, and tried to the court, on the general issue, with notice, before Beardsley, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiffs, and motion in error by the defendant. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Replevin for a quantity of flour; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the jury on the general issue, -with notice, before Fyler, J. Verdict for defendant, and motion for a new trial by the plaintiffs. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill in equity for the removal of a cloud from a title; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried before flail, J. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Trespass de tonus asportatis, with a count in trover; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the court on the general issue with notice before Fyler, J. Judgment for the defendant and motion for a new trial by the plaintiff. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Trover for a quantity of goods; brought to the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County, and tried to the court on the general issue, with notice, before Sail, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the defendants, and motion in error by the plaintiff. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Information in the nature of a writ of quo warranto; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. Facts found and case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for the breach of a contract to employ the plaintiff as a teacher and pay him a salary of fifteen hundred dollars; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County, and tried to the jury on the general issue with notice before Culver, J. Yerdict for the plaintiff, and motion for a new trial by the defendants for errors in the rulings and charge of the court; also a motion in error. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit against the defendant as guarantor of a bill of exchange; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fair-field County and tried to the court before Sail, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff. Motion for a new trial by the defendant. The case is sufficiently stated, in the opinion.

Bill for a foreclosure; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. Facts found by a committee and decree passed, (Quiver, J.) Motion in error by respondent. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Replevin for a sail-boat; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County and tried to the court before Sail, J. Facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff. Motion in error by the defendant. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Mead, deceased; taken to the Superior Court in Fairfield County. The following facts were found by the court:— Theodore H. Mead, of Greenwich, in this state, died intestate, January U fch, 1876. Administration was granted on his estate; the state was represented insolvent, and commissioners were appointed.

Assumpsit against the endorser of a promissory note;: brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County,, and tried to the jury on the general issue before Hall, J. Verdict for the plaintiff, and a motion for a new trial by the defendant for error in the charge of the court. The case is; sufficiently stated in the opinion.-

Middlebrook, deceased, in allowing a claim in favor of Elijah Middlebrook, Jr., the appellant being a creditor of the estate; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County.

Replevin, brought, by appeal from a justice of the peace, to the Court of Common Pleas of Eairfield County, and tried in that court before Sail, J. Pacts found and judgment rendered for the defendants for damages and costs, and for a return of the property. Motion in error by the plaintiff. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for rent for tlie use and occupation of certain premises; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the court, on the general issue, before Mall, J. The suit was brought by the plaintiff as assignee of one Seeley. Seeley between the years 1866 and 1873 had made several mortgages, embracing the premises in question, to one Hubbard, and had made- later mortgages in 1874 and 1875 to one Daskam and one Godfrey.

Ejectment; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Eairfield County. Eacts found and case reserved for advice. The case is fully stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit upon a promissory note; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Fairfield County, and tried to the jury before Beers, J. Verdict for the defendant Buckingham, who alone made defence. Motion for a new trial by the plaintiff for error in the rulings of the court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Writ op error upon a judgment of the Superior Court denying a motion to set aside a non-suit. The non-suit had been ordered, under Gen. Statutes, p. 443, sec. 3, upon the motion of the defendant, upon the ground that the plaintiff had failed to make out a prima facie case.

Writ of error from the judgment of a county commissioner and a justice of the peace upon a complaint for a forcible entry and detainer; taken to the Superior Court in New Haven County. Judgment reversed by that court, and motion in error by the defendant to this court. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

<p>W was appointed in the state of New Jersey receiver of an insolvent corporation located there, which had on hand at the time a contract with two towns in this state to construct a bridge. The receiver went on and built the bridge, under a parol agreement to that effect with the towns, using materials which he bought with the funds of the corporation which he held as receiver, and doing the work for the benefit of the creditors of the corporation. After the bridge was completed, a Connecticut creditor, who knew all the facts, factorized one of the towns for a balance due for the construction of the bridge. The work had been done and the bills made out in the name of the corporation. Held—</p>

Petition in chancery for the specific performance of a contract with regard to real estate; brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County. The respondents demurred to the bill, and the court (Sanford, JT,) sustained the demurrer and dismissed the bill. Motion in error by the petitioner. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Information in the nature of a writ of quo warranto; brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County. The relators were the City of Waterbury, and Eugene S. Wyman, who was averred to be “ treasurer of the city and a tax-payer therein.” The facts were found by the court and the case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit for a breach of contract in ■wrongfully cancelling a policy of life insurance issued by the defendants in favor of the plaintiffs; brought to the Court of Common Pleas in New Ilaven County, and tried to the jury, on the general issue with notice, before Stoddard, J. The insurance was upon the joint lives of the plaintiffs, Edmund A. Wilmot and Cynthia J. Wilmot his wife, for the sum of $2,000 payable to the survivor on the death of either, upon an annual premium of…

Assumpsit, to recover fees for serving as an officer two criminal warrants; brought by appeal from a justice of the peace, to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County. The defendants demurred to the declaration, and the court (Harrison, J.,~) held it insufficient, and rendered judgment for the defendants. Motion in error by the plaintiff.

Assumpsit on a promissory note; brought by the plaintiff as assignee of the payee, to the Court of Common Pleas of New Haven County, and tried to the court before Cowell, J. Judgment for the defendants and motion for a new trial by the plaintiff. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Appeal to the Superior Court in New Haven County from an appraisal of damages for land of the appellant taken by the city of Meriden in altering the line of a public highway. Eacts found and case reserved for advice. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Action of covenant upon the covenants of seizin and warranty in a deed; brought to the Superior Court in New Haven County, and tried to the court on the general issue, with notice, before Carpenter, J. The deed in question was made by Thomas Burlock to the plaintiffs, in October, 1863. He died in 1865 and the defendants were administrators of his estate, and had immediately after settled it, with an order limiting the time for presenting claims against his estate.

Bill for a foreclosure, for the removal of a cloud upon the-petitioners’ title arising from tax sales, and for possession of the mortgaged premises; brought to the City Court of the city of Hartford. The following facts among others were •found by the court:— On tlie 14th of April, 1871, Alfred E. Ely, who then owned the premises, which consisted of a dwelling-house and lot in the city of Hartford, mortgaged the same to the petitioners to secure his note for $5,000.

The appeal described the appellant as “brother of said deceased,” but did not state what interest he had as such in the matter of the appeal. In his reasons of appeal filed in the Superior Court he alleged that he was the heir at law of the deceased. The appellees moved that the case be erased from the docket, and the court (Hovey, J!,) ordered it erased. The appellant brought the record before this court by a motion in error.

Assumpsit; brought to the Court of Common Pleas of Hartford County, and tried before Fellowes, Acting Judge. Facts found, and judgment rendered for the plaintiff for a part only of his demand, and motion in error by the plaintiff. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

■ Indictment for murder in the first degree, in the Superioi Court in Hartford County.

Petition to Judge Carpenter, as a judge of the Superior Court, to be declared elected to the office of first selectman; brought under the provisions of the act of 1878. The aliegations of the petition found true, and judgment rendered for the petitioner. Motion in error by the respondent. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit on a promissory note signed by the defendant jointly with one George S. Charter; brought to the City Court of the city of Hartford.

Assumpsit; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County, and tried to the court before Eovey, J. Judgment for the plaintiffs, and motion for a new trial by the defendant. ' The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill to foreclose a builder’s lien; brought to the City Court of the city of Hartford, and heard before Bennett, J. Facts found and decree passed. Motion in error by respondents. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit against the defendant as indorser of a promissory note; brought to the Court of Common Pleas, of Hartford County. The following facts, were found by a committee:— The note in question is as follows:— “$500. July 1, 1877. Two months after date I promise to pay to the order of James Gill Five Hundred Dollars at .¿Etna Nat. Bank, value received.

Bill in equity for an injunction against the prosecution of an action at law, and for the cancellation of a mortgage; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County, and heard before Hitchcock, J. Facts found and bill dismissed, and motion in error by the petitioners. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Assumpsit to recover money paid on a mortgage and the value of certain property foreclosed; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County. The folio-wing facts were found by a committee:— • In September, 1875, the plaintiff was indebted to the Norwich Savings Society in the sum of $10,000, and to one Frary in the sum of $4,950; and both these debts were secured by mortgages on several parcels of real estate in the city of Hartford, described in the plaintiff’s declaration.

Assumpsit, on a promissory note and for money had and received; brought to the Superior Court in Hartford County. The defendant pleaded the general issue, with notice of a set-off of an account for services and expenses and for money paid. The facts were found by a committee, and on the facts judgment rendered for the plaintiff, (Hovey, J.) Motions in error by both parties. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Bill in equity for the appointment of a receiver of partnership property and tlie settlement of the affairs of the partnership; brought to the Superior Court in Windham County. The question in the case arose on the report of a committee appointed to ascertain the partnership debts, and is fully stated in the opinion. The case was brought up by a motion in error.

Bill in equity for an injunction against further proceedings in an action at law upon a judgment obtained against the petitioners by the respondent as administrator of the estate of one Atkinson; brought to the Superior Court in New London County. The case was before this court at a former term, (ante p. 65,) upon a demurrer to the bill.

<p>Where a judgment has been rendered against a party who in fact had no notice of the pendency of the suit, he has a remedy by statute in the bringing of a petition for a new trial and at common law by a writ of error coram nobis.</p> <p>If the three years limited by law for the institution of these proceedings has passed, he may bring a bill in equity for relief.</p> <p>But he is bound to seek the aid of a court of equity with no unreasonable delay, and whether he has been negligent in any particular case must depend upon the circumstances of the case.</p> <p>Ordinarily if a party has full knowledge of the existence of the judgment against him, the court would apply the same limitation to his case in equity as would be applied at law.</p> <p>But where a party had no knowledge whatever of the existence of the judgment and was in no fault in the matter, a court of equity will entertain his case within a reasonable time after the matter comes to his knowledge.</p> <p>The relief granted by a court of equity may he by opening the judgment and allowing a new trial at law, hut it will ordinarily hear the case on its merits, and grant a perpetual injunction against the enforcement of the judgment at law, if a good defence is established against the entire claim upon which it is founded, or against the enforcement of a part of the judgment if the defence goes only to a part of the claim.</p> <p>But it is necessary that such a petition should show the character of the claim upon which the judgment is based, as well as the character of the defence, that the court may see that there was a good defence that might have been made.</p>

<p>Action for a breach of promise of marriage, aggravated, by-seduction and child-birth; brought to the Superior Court in New London County, and tried to the jury on the plea of not guilty, before Park, O. J. Verdict for the plaintiff for six thousand, dollars. Motion for a new trial by the defendant for error in the charge of the judge. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.</p>