Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1805

Griggs v. Dodge

Griggs v. Dodge
Supreme Court of Connecticut · Decided July 1, 1805 · Allen, Assts, Austin, Edmond, Gov, Newberry, Treadwell
2 Day 28

Counsel

Cyrll Dodge, Plaintiff ¡ David Griggs, and Sarah, his Wife, Defendants., í}nkig/i¡ and William Perkins, for the plaintiff in error., Goddard-, for the defendant in error.

Griggs v. Dodge

Opinion of the Court

By the Court, Treadwell, Lt, Gov. Newberry, Austin, Allen, and Edmond, Assts. dissenting,

the judgment was affirmed, (r) As to the power of limitation, there was no difference of opinion, except as to the extent to which it should be carried : whether it should be restricted to such articles as stock, cash, &c. which perish not with the using, or should comprise every description of personal property, was a subject of some doubt. The majority, however, were of opinion, that the rule must be universal; and that it must be left to the discretion of mankind, to make the application. The principal division was on the question, whether the party, in this case, had resorted to his proper remedy.

The decision was delayed, until the case of Taber v. Packwood, post, in which the principal point was the same as in this, had been ar gued.

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