Connecticut Reports; Proceedings in the Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut Volume 47

Connecticut Reports; Proceedings in the Supreme Court of the State of Connecticut Volume 47

List price: US$12.81

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1881 edition. Excerpt: ...the parties are entitled to a jury trial under our constitution, and that the statute, if interpreted as authorizing a trial by the court without the consent of both parties, is unconstitutional. It is obvious that there was and could be no trial by jury in the proceeding for a writ of mandamus at common law, for no issue of fact could be tried in that proceeding. Such a trial was provided for in the statute of 1711, 9th of Anne; but that statute as such was never in force in Connecticut, and was not a part of the common law. It is true a note at the end of Strong's Case, Kirby, 351, says: --" At the February term, 1788, the mandamus was returned; and the court was requested to direct what should be the rule of proceeding in trying the sufficiency of the return; whether the common law, as it stood before the statute of 9th of Anne, or that statute; and the court said the statute of Anne should be the rule of proceeding." The only question seems to have been whether the sufficiency of the return should be tried in _that proceeding, or whether the plaintiff should be compelled to bring an action for a false return. That case well illustrates the defect of the common law. It was an action to compel the town clerk to record a deed. It is obvious that an action for damages was not a complete and adequate remedy, and the court wisely decided that the facts might be determined in that case, so that the plaintiff might have his writ if entitled to it. In so deciding the court adopted the principle of the statute of Anne as a part of the common law of this state. The mode of trial--whether by the court or jury--was not the question. The court, by deciding that the statute of Anne should be the rule of proceeding, did not decide...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 238 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 13mm | 431g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236938364
  • 9781236938367