Case ID: root_1/html/0077-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HARTFORD, ADJOURNED SUPERIOR COURT,
    DECEMBER, A. D. 1777.
    Clark v. Brown et ux.
    Eeboe to reverse a judgment of the County Court, in an action of assumpsit, brought by said Brown and wife against Clark; declaring, that in consideration of a deed executed by the wife, when a feme sole, of a certain, piece of land, described, tbe said Clark assumed and promised to pay to ber the sum of £14 lawful money in a reasonable time; which he has never performed.
    To this declaration the defendant demurred —And judgment of the County Court, that the declaration is sufficient; and for the plaintiffs to recover.
    Errors assigned are — 1st. That there is no direct averment that said deed was ever delivered. 2d. That said promise is by parol, and within the statute made to prevent frauds and perjuries. ' ,
   Judgment of the Superior Court — That there is nothing erroneous in the judgment complained of. Eor first, the defendant cannot take advantage of the statute upon a general demurrer, for the plaintiff may have a written note or memorandum of th°e promise, which he might produce in evidence. 2d. This action is not brought on the parol agreement only, but upon an agreement executed on one part; and so is not within the statute. Gilbert Court of Chancery, 231; 1 Bacon Ab. 74, and 75; 2 Str. 783; 1 Blac. Reports, 600.