Abel v. Godfry
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Abel v. Godfry, 1 Root 494 (Conn. 1793)
Abel v. Godfry
Opinion of 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.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Sheriff Abel v. Godfry & Nash
- Status
- Published