Green v. Hobby

Decided June 15, 1830

Supreme Court of Connecticut · decided 1830-06-15

This was an action on the statute concerning fences and common fields, brought before a justice of the peace; where the parties agreed upon a statement of facts, subject to the opinion of the superior court. A case thus made was entered in that court, and reserved for the advice of this Court. It was now submitted without argument.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1830-06-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently July 2001

4 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Peters, J.

¶1The Supreme Court of Errors has legal cognizance only of writs of error from the superior court. But as in the course of trials in that court, interlocutory and other questions frequently arise, which require advice or revision, a rule has been adopted, authorizing the superior court, at their discretion, to reserve for the advice of this Court such questions as may arise on motions for new trial and cases stated in the superior court. But to authorize the interference of this Court, in any case, it must have come regularly before the superior court, by appeal, writ of error or original process ; as there is no rule or law authorizing the Supreme Court of Errors to take cognizance of a case stated by an inferior court. This case, here, is coram nonjudice, and must be stricken from the docket.

The other Judges were of the same opinion.

¶2Erased from the docket.