Phetteplace v. Steere

Decided November 15, 1807

New York Supreme Court · decided 1807-11-15

From the return of the writ of error in this cause, directed to the court of common pleas for the county of Chenango, it. appeared, that the declaration in the court below contained three counts. 1. For money had and received to the plaintiff’s use; 2. For money paid, &e. to the use of the defendant; 3.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 1836

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1807-11-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Spencer, J.

¶1delivered the opiniou of the court. This case has been submitted to the court without argument. The only error pointed out is in the third count in the declaration, which alleges, that the plaintiff in error promised to pay damages beyond the surplus money in his hands, arising from the sale of the property of the defendant in error. We are of opinion, that the promise, as to the damages, was without consideration; but that it was good as to the surplus money. On the authority of the case of Steele v. Western Inland Lock Navigation Company,*we intend, that on the trial of the cause, the jury did not assess damages on that part of the promise which was a nudum,pactum. The judgment below must be affirmed.

¶2Judgment affirmed.

¶3 ante, 283.