¶1delivered the opinion of the Court. The whole of the grounds in this case will depend on this inquiry, Was it necessary the plaintiff should perform his promise to make titles to the defendant, before the notes on which the action is founded were paid? The contract to make titles was independent of the defendant’s engagements under these notes. By its express terms it was to be performed after the payment of them. It is enough, then, if he shall be ready to perform his engagement when tnese notes shall be paid, and a present incapacity can be no defence to this action, and of course, the title being out of him for a moment, will not be a ground of defence. When the notes shall be paid, the plaintiff will be bound to make titles to the defendant, let the title be in whom it may, or suffer the legal consequences of the non-performance of his contract.
9 S.C.L. 56
Davis v. Woodward
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Decided May 15, 1818
Supreme Court of South Carolina · decided 1818-05-15
This was an action of assumpsit on two notes of hand. It was proved they were given for the * * 0 purchase money of a tract of land. At the time the notes were given, the plaintiff bound himself l>y an instrument of writing, which was given in evidence, to make titles to the defendant after the payment of these notes, and the clear meaning of the instrument was, that the payment of the notes should precede the making of titles.
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1928
1 state decisions
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1818-05-15
View the full empirical analysis of this case →