Allen v. Ruland

Citation79 Conn. 405,65 A. 138
PartiesALLEN v. RULAND et al.
Decision Date18 December 1906
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

Appeal from Superior Court, Fairfield County; Edwin B. Gager, Judge.

Action for false imprisonment by William S. Allen against Frederick D. Ruland and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

The third defense read thus: "One James H. Ward and one Edith Ward were joint tort-feasors with the defendants in the alleged seizure and detention of the plaintiff, and, since the institution of this action, to wit: on the ——— day of ——, the plaintiff has executed and delivered to said James H. Ward and Edith Ward, for a valuable consideration, a full release and discharge of said cause of action, and thereby discharged these defendants from all claims for dam ages for said alleged cause of action." After the overruling of the demurrer to it, the following reply was filed: "(1) The plaintiff denies the truth of the matters contained in said third defense of the defendants. (2) If any release exists between the plaintiff and said James H. and Edith Ward, which, by its terms, is broad enough to cover this cause of action the same was given in satisfaction of other demands, and did not refer to, and was not intended to discharge, the cause of action now pending." To this a rejoinder was filed denying the truth of the allegations in its second paragraph.

On the trial it was undisputed that the plaintiff had been confined for a time by the defendants in a sanitarium at Westport; and that he had a sister Ethel (or Ethelinda), who was the wife of James H. Ward. The plaintiff offered evidence that he had complained to Mr. and Mrs. Ward of having been annoyed by strangers on the street, and that soon afterwards he was forcibly taken against his will to this sanitarium by attendants of the defendants sent for the purpose at the request of Mr. and Mrs. Ward, and accompanied by Mr. Ward; that he was kept there under restraint from 1896 to 1902; and that Mrs. Ward, meanwhile, took charge of his financial affairs, and from his moneys paid the defendants for keeping him so confined, and also for certain extras furnished to the plaintiff at his own request

The defendants offered evidence that in 1896 the plaintiff had been pronounced insane by two physicians, who advised Mr. and Mrs. Ward that he should be at once placed under restraint; that, at Mrs. Ward's request, the defendants with Mr. Ward took him to their sanitarium; and that in 1903, after he had been released from all constraint, and had left the sanitarium, an attorney, acting for Mr. and Mrs. Ward, paid him $200, in full satisfaction of any money demand against them, taking the following release: "To All to Whom These Presents shall Come or may Come—Greeting: Know ye, that I, William S. V. Allen, for and in consideration of the sum of two hundred ($200) dollars, lawful money of the United States, to me in hand paid by James H. Ward and Ethel V. Ward, have remised, released and forever discharged, and by these presents do for myself, my heirs, executors and administrators, remise, release and forever discharge the said James H. Ward and Ethel V. Ward, their heirs, executors and administrators, of and from all manner of action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts, dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promises, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, extents, executions, claims and demands whatsoever, In law or equity, which against them or either of them I ever had, now have, or which my heirs, executors or administrators hereafter can, shall or may have, for, upon, or by reason of any matter, cause or thing whatsoever, from the beginning of the world to the day of the date of these presents, excepting a claim as to certain personal effects, consisting of books, clothes and pictures alleged by me to be in the possession of Ethel V. Ward or James H. Ward, and which belong to me. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, the 13th day of March, one thousand nine hundred and three. Wm. S. V. Allen. [Seal.] Sealed and delivered in presence of John J. Griffin."

The defendants further offered evidence that afterwards a controversy arose between the plaintiff and his sister as to the ownership of certain articles of personal property, and that he thereupon gave Mr. and Mrs. Ward a paper, with a schedule attached, which paper read as follows: "To All to Whom These Presents shall Come or may Concern—Greeting: Know ye, that I, William Sullivant Allen, also known as William S. Vanderbilt Allen, for and in consideration of the receipt of the articles described in Schedule A, hereto annexed and made a part hereof, and one dollar, lawfully money of the United States, to me in hand paid by James H. Ward and Ethelinda V Ward, have remised, released and forever discharged, and by these presents do for myself, my heirs, executors and administrators, remise, release and forever discharge the said James H. Ward and Ethelinda V. Ward and each of them, their and each of their heirs, executors and administrators of and from all and all manner of action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts, dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, bonds, bills, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, premises, variances, trespasses, damages, judgments, extents, executions, claims and demands whatsoever, in law or in equity, which against them or either of them I ever had, now have, or which my heirs, executors or administrators hereafter can, shall or may have, for upon, or by reason of any matter, cause or thing whatsoever, from the beginning of the world to the day of the date of these presents, excepting and excluding the following described articles belonging to me and which I assert are now in the possession of the said James H. Ward or Ethelinda V. Ward, or both of them.: 1 Silver-plated 'cocktail' shaker. 1 silver corkscrew. 1 pair silver wire cutters. 1 silver...

To continue reading

Request your trial
39 cases
  • Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. Thompson
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • 18 January 1927
    ......Co. v. Goodholm, 61 Kan. 758, 60 P. 1066; Cleveland, etc.,. R. R. Co. v. Hilligoss, 171 Ind. 417, 86 N.E. 485, 131. Am. St. Rep. 258; Allen v. Ruland, 79 Conn. 405, 65. A. 138, 118 Am. St. Rep. 146, 8 Ann. Cas. 344; 34 Cyc. 1053,. and cases cited. . . Whether. or not ......
  • Natrona Power Company v. Clark
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 6 May 1924
    ...statements or reservations outside the written release was incompetent, Reynolds v. Morton supra; 1 Greenleaf 13th ed. 275; Allen v. Ruland supra; Goss Ellison supra; Leddy v. Barney supra; Ry. Co. v. Sullivan supra; Wodock v. Robertson supra; Sayre v. Burdick supra; Current v. Muir supra; ......
  • Dwy v. Conn. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • 26 January 1915
    ...of unexpressed intent. Brooks v. Stewart, 9 Ad. & El. L. 854; Cocks v. Nash, 9 Bing. 341, 345; Allen v. Ruland, 79 Conn. 405, 411, 65 Atl. 138, 118 Am. St. Rep. 146, 8 Ann. Cas. 344. It has also been said that the seal affixed to the release furnishes a conclusive presumption that the relea......
  • Bernhard v. Rochester German Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • 18 December 1906
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT