Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1793

Abel v. Godfry

Abel v. Godfry
Supreme Court of Connecticut · Decided January 15, 1793
1 Root 494

Abel v. Godfry

Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

The motion in arrest is insufficient and the plaintiff must have judgment.

The statute is to have a reasonable construction, and although made upon principles of humanity of poor imprisoned debtors, yet it is not to be so construed as to- become a trap to defraud the creditor. The money left was sufficient to pay for his breakfast, and he could not be in want of support until that was digested. See Sheriff Fitch v. Cook, New Haven, August Term, 1791.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.