Demand

A claim; a legal obligation. Demand is a term of art of an extent er in its signification than any other word except claim.

Co. Lift. 291; In re Denny, 1! Hill (N. I.) 220; Scott v..Morris, 9 S. & R. (Pa.) 124; Murphy's Appeal, 0 W. & S. (Pa.) 226.

— A release of all demands is, in general, a release of all covenants, real or pen conditions, whether broken or not, annuities, recognizances, obligations, contracts, and the like; In re Denny, •_' Hill (N. Y.t 220; but does not discharge rent before it is due, if it be a rent incident to trie reversion;

— for the rent was not only not due, but the consideration — the future enjoyment of the lands — for which the rent was to be given was not executed; l Lev. 99; Baa Ahr. Release, I. See 10 Co. 128; Bordman v. I >-born, L>:? Pick. (Mass.) 295; Martin v. Martin, 7 Md. 375, 63 Am. Dec. 364; Favors v. Johnson. 79 Qa. 555, 4 S. E3. 925. In Practice. A requisition or request to do a particular thing specified under a claim of right on the part of the person requesting. Jn causes of action arising ex contractu It is frequently necessary, to enable plaintiff to bring an action, that be should make a demand upon the party bound to perform the contract or discbarge the obligation. Thus, where property Is sold to be paid for on delivery, a demand must be made I bringing an action for non-delivery, and prov- 512; but not if the seller has incapacitated himself from delivering; 5 B. & Aid. 712; Wilmouth v. Patton, 2 Bibb (Ky.) 280; Bobbins v. Luce, 4 Mass. 474; and this rule and exception apply to contracts for marriage; 2 Dowl. & R. 55; 1 Chit Pr. 57, note (n), 438, note (e). Nor is a demand necessary where it is to be presumed that it would have been unavailing; Davenport v. Ladd, 38 Minn. 545, 38 N. W. 622; Bogle v. Gordon, 39 Kan. 31, 17 Pac. 857. Where a selling price has been agreed on, the bringing of a suit therefor is a sufficient demand for the money claimed; Maguire v. Durant, 1 Misc. 509, 20 N. Y. Supp. 617. A demand of rent is necessary before re-entry for nonpayment; Parks v. Hays, 92 Tenn. 161, 22 S. W. 3. But where rent is payable on the first day of the month, no demand of the rent on the day it falls due is necessary to entitle the landlord to maintain an action therefor; Clarke v. Charter, 128 Mass. 483. See Re-entkt. No demand is in general necessary on a promissory note before bringing an action; but after a tender demand must be made of the snm tendered; 1 Campb. 181, 474; 1 Stark. 323. A note payable "on call" may be sued on without demand; Mobile Sav. Bank v. Mc Donnell, 83 Ala. 595, 4 South. 346; but a demand and notice of non-payment are essential to fix the liability of endorsers unless waived; Presbrey v. Thomas, 1 App. D. C. 171. Where a mortgagor has resolved to default on an interest coupon and provides no funds to pay it, the holder is not required to present it for payment before bringing suit; Conshohocken Tube Co. v. Equipment Co., 161 Pa. 391, 28 Atl. 1119. Cases in which a demand was held necessary before action were suits upon a partnership; Codman v. Rogers, 10 Pick. 112; moneys received but not accounted for by an attorney to his client; Sheaf v. Dodge, 161 Ind. 270, 68 N. E. 292; Banner v. D'Auby, 34 Misc. 525, 69 N. Y. Supp. 891; Madden v. Watts, 59 S. C. 81, 37 S. E. 209; Taylor v. Bates, 5 Cow. (N. Y.) 376; Sneed v. Hanley, Hemp. 659, Fed. Cas. No. 13,136; moneys received by a corporation officer not accounted for; Landis v. Saxton, 105 Mo. 486, 16 S. W. 912, 24 Am. St. Rep. 403; claim of reinstatement in a body from which one was illegally expelled; Meherin v. Produce Exchange, 117 Cal. 215, 48 Pac. 1074; money realized by a sheriff on execution but not paid over; Keithler v. Foster, 22 Ohio St. 27; a certificate of deposit issued by a bank which by its terms was payable on its return properly endorsed; Elliott v. Bank, 128 la. 275, 103 N. W. 777, 1 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1130, 111 Am. St. Rep. 19S; Hillsinger v. Bank, 108 Ga. 357, 33 S. E. 985, 75 Am. St. Rep. 42; but in another case it was held that action would lie without demand on (N. S.) 1130, n. A demand is also required before action to recover a deposit in a bank; Johnson v. Bank, 1 Harring. (Del.) 117; Sickles v. Herold, 149 N. Y. 332, 43 N. E. 852; Tobias v. Morris, 126 Ala. 535, 28 South. 517. A demand is not necessary before suit for rent, whether payable in money in advance; Clarke v. Charter, 128 Mass. 483;

— or in labor or property payable at a fixed time and place; Packer v. Cockayne, 3 G. Greene (la.) Ill; and in a suit for rent the demand need not be proved even where pleaded; Gruhn v. Gudebrod Bros. Co., 21 Misc. 528, 47 N. Y. Supp. 714;

— for articles charged on land devised to and accepted by residuary devisee; WTiggin v. Wiggin, 43 N. H. 561, 80 Am. Dec. 192;

— for boarding a man under a contract; Chappell v. Woods, 9 Wash. 134, 37 Pac. 286;

— for fees of an attorney; Foster v. Newbrough, 66 Barb. (N. Y.) 645; Gibbs v. Davis, 11 Or. 2S8, 3 Pac. 677; but in New Jersey the rendering of an account is a condition precedent to a suit; Truitt v. Darnell, 65 N. J. Eq. 221, 55 Atl. 692. In cases arising ex delicto, a demand is frequently necessary. Thus, when the wife, apprentice, or servant of one person has been harbored by another, the proper course is to make a demand of restoration before an action brought, in order to constitute the party a wilful wrong-doer unless the plaintiff can prove an original illegal enticing away; 2 Lev. 63; 5 East 39; 4 J. B. Moo. 12. So, too, in cases where the taking of goods is lawful but their subsequent detention becomes illegal, it is absolutely necessary, in order to secure sufficient evidence of a conversion on the trial, to give a formal notice of the owner's right to the property and possession, and to make a formal demand in writing of the delivery of such possession to the owner. See Trover; Conversion. And when a nuisance has been erected or continued by a man on his own land, it is advisable, particularly in the case of a private nuisance, to give tbe party notice, and request him to remove it, either before an entry is made for the purpose of abating it or an action is commenced against the wrongdoer; and a demand is always indispensable in cases of a continuance of a nuisance originally created by another person; 2 B. & C. 302; Cro. Jac. 555; Poll. Torts 314; 5 Co. 100; 5 Viner, Abr. 506; 1 Ayliffe, Pand. 497; Bac. Abr. Rent, I. In cases of contempts, as where an order to pay money or to do any other thing, has been made a rule of court, a demand for the payment of the money or performance of the thing must be made before an attachment will be issued for a contempt; 1 Cr. M. & R. 88, 459; 4 Tyrwh. 369; 2 Scott 193. Demand should be made by the party having the right, or his authorized agent; 2 B. 17,201; Clough v. Unity, 18 N. H. 75; Sebrell v. Couch, 55 Ind. 122; of the person in default, in cases of torts; 8 B. & C. 528; Shotwell v. Few, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 302; Bridgeport Bank v. R. Co., 30 Conn. 237; in ca rent; 2 Washb. R. P. 321 and at a proper time and place in case of rents; Jackson v. Klpp, 3 Wend. (N. Y.) 230; Jackson v. Ilarri- Bon, 17 Johns. (N. Y.) GG; Mc Murphy v. Minot, 4 X. H. 251; Mackubin v. Whetcroft,' 4 I lair. & McH. (Mil.) L35; Bradstreet v. Clark, 21 Pick. (Mass.) 389; Pay v. shanks, 56 I ml. 554; in cases of notes and hills of exchange; Pars. Notes & B. As to the allegation of a demand in a declaration, see 1 Chit PI. 322; -' id. 84; 1 Wins. Baund. 33, note 2; Bunn v. Lett, G5 Hun 43, id x. Y. Supp. 72S; Com. Dig. Pleader.