11 Johns. 145
Decided May 15, 1814
New York Supreme Court · decided 1814-05-15
IN ERROR, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Beebee 7 7 u . brought an action against Benedict, before the justice, and dedared for goods sold and delivered, work and labour, money had and received, and also for damages in. not performing a certain contract relative to the possession and improvement of a certain farm. The defendant objected to any evidence as to the contract stated in the plaintiff’s declaration, relative to the farm.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1814-05-15
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently February 1934
5 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1The plaintiff having expressly abandoned all claim for damages for a breach of the contract as to the farm, all objections as to the statute of frauds are removed. A promise or undertaking by the defendant to pay the plaintiff for the improvements made by the deienxfant on the land, is not void under the statute. It was so decided by this court in the case of Freer v. Hardenbergh. (5 Johns. Rep. 272.)
¶2The judgment below must be affirmed.
¶3Judgment affirmed.