Case Name: Rogers v. Henry
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1792-09
Citations: 1 Root 470
Docket Number: 
Parties: Rogers v. Henry.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 470–470

Head Matter:
NEW LONDON COUNTY,
SEPTEMBER TERM, A. D. 1792.
Rogers v. Henry.
Assumpsit will not lie for a sum a person is doomed to* pay.
.Error to reverse a judgment of a justice in an action brought by Henry v. Rogers; declaring, that he was head, of a class for raising recruits in A. D. 1781, to which the defendant belonged; that the defendant was assessed twenty-two shillings eight pence by said class as his proportion to pay; that the defendant never paid said sum, and the plaintiff paid it for him; that in April 1792, upon application of the plaintiff to the selectmen, pursuant to the existing law in A. D. 1781, they doomed the defendant to pay forty shillings, for his neglect; which the defendant thereupon became liable to pay, and in consideration thereof assumed and promised- to pay said forty shillings, etc.
Plea in bar — That by the law then existing, the sum which the defendant was doomed to pay, was to be collected by warrant, and not otherwise. Demurrer.
Judgment of the justice — That the plea was insufficient,, and for the plaintiff to recover. ' a
Common errors assigned.

Opinion:
Judgment — Manifest error; for that assumpsit doth not lie for the sum the defendant was doomed to pay, any more than for a sum judgment was rendered for, the law provides a remedy in one case as well as the other.