Case Name: Carew v. Bond
Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Connecticut
Decision Date: 1791-03
Citations: 1 Root 269
Docket Number: 
Parties: Carew v. Bond.
Judges: 
Reporter: Connecticut Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 269–269

Head Matter:
Carew v. Bond.
Action of indebitatus assumpsit will not lie where there is a written agreement, hut an action on the agreement.
Eebob to reverse a judgment of a justice, in an action of indebitatus assumpsit, upon a written agreement; which was, that in case the plaintiff should be reduced to want, the defendant would let him have the improvement of twenty-six acres of land or £26 in money; that he was reduced to want and the defendant had let him have neither, and thereupon he became liable and assumed, etc.
There were long special pleadings, which terminated in a demurrer, and judgment was for the plaintiff to recover, and now the judgment is reversed.

Opinion:
By the Court.
Where the parties have entered into a particular written agreement respecting any matter, the remedy for any breach is upon the agreement; and not by action of indebitatus assumpsit.