Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

11 Johns. 59

Smith v. Sanborn

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1814

New York Supreme Court · decided 1814-01-15

THIS was an action of assumpsit on a memorandum or agree.ment, dated the 20th of December, 1810, by which the defendant agreed and promised to pay the plaintiff eight dollars an acre for each and every acre contained in the south equal halt part of lot No. 68. in the fifth township, &c. containing 125 acres, or thereabouts ; the estimated sum amounting to one thousand dollars, of which three hundred dollars were to be paid on or before the 20th of April, 1811, and the…

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1814-01-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1923

6 state decisions

40181418201830184018501860187018801890190019101920decided

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 →

Per Curiam.

¶1This appears to have been an alternative obligation, and the defendant had his election to pay at the rate of eight dollars an acre by certain times, or to pay nine dollars an acre by another specified time, and which last time had not arrived when the suit was commenced. The right of electing the alternative belonged to the defendant. This appears by the case of M‘Nitt v. Clarke, (7 Johns. Rep. 465.) and the authorities there referred to. The right of election by the debtor in all alternative obligations, was also a principle in the civil law, and the passages in support of it are collected by Pothier. (Traité des Obligations, n. 246, 247.) The plaintiff) therefore, on this point ought to have been nonsuited at the trial.

¶2Whether the whole contract was not from the beginning a felo de se, and null and void by reason of the last provision in it, has also been made a question. But it is unnecessary to give an opinion on that point in the present suit. It may be more maturely considered if the contract should again be brought before the court in a new suit.

¶3The verdict must be set aside, and a judgment of nonsuit entered.

¶4Judgment of nonsuit.

/11/johns/59 · .json · Public domain