Case Name: Burbanks v. Lee
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1791-03
Citations: 1 Root 262
Docket Number: 
Parties: Burbanks v. Lee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 262–262

Head Matter:
Burbanks v. Lee.
Indebitatus assumpsit will not lie to recover back money, paid upon a judgment grounded on tbe confession of tbe party.
EbROR to reverse a judgment of Justice Eoot in an action-of indebitatus assumpsit, Lee v. Burbanks; declaring, that trusting to the cast of said Burbanks, he confessed judgment before Justice Cady on a note for £4 16s., when £3 only was due thereon, which he had been obliged to pay.
To which action a plea in abatement was given — 1st. That said Justice Eoot could not take cognizance nor inquire into Justice Cady’s judgment to reverse or alter it; said plea was judged insufficient. The defendant then demurred to the declaration; and the justice gave judgment, that the defendant’s plea was insufficient and for the plaintiff to recover £1 16s.
Errors assigned — 1st. That said declaration was insufficient. 2d. That said justice had not 'answered the issue put to him.

Opinion:
Judgment — Manifest error, both as to substance and form. Indebitatus assumpsit will not lie to recover money back which has been paid upon a judgment by the confession of the plaintiff.