Hounsford v. Fisher
Ohio Supreme Court
Covenant, on a contract by which Fisher agreed to deliver Hounsford on the 17th January, 1832, four stallions, Sir Alfred, Robin Redbreast, Friendly Tiger, and Black Fox, for which Hounsford agreed to make Fisher a deed for the exclusive right to make and vend the revolving worker, in certain counties, and the parties bound themselves in a penalty of $700 to perform the contract.
Read the full summary
Covenant, on a contract by which Fisher agreed to deliver Hounsford on the 17th January, 1832, four stallions, Sir Alfred, Robin Redbreast, Friendly Tiger, and Black Fox, for which Hounsford agreed to make Fisher a deed for the exclusive right to make and vend the revolving worker, in certain counties, and the parties bound themselves in a penalty of $700 to perform the contract. Plea, that Fisher on the day named in the contract, was ready at the place and ready to deliver the horses on receiving the deed, but the plaintiff did not deliver a valid deed. To this plea thei-e is a general…
1Opinion of the CourtWright, J.
We think these covenants mutual; the acts tobe done are simultaneous, and the act of each is the entire consideration for the act of the other. In such cases, neither party can sue without first performing, or offering to perform, his part of the covenants: (1 Saund. 320; Doug. 684, 91; 4 T. R. 761; 6 T. R. 665; 2 John. 207; 5 John. 145, 179; 10 John. 203, 209, 266; 3 John. 146; 1 Caines 45; 6 Cowen 624; 12 John. 209; 4 Day 313; 6 Bin. 24; 2 H. Black. 123; 5 East. 107; 8 Taunt. 62; 5 T. R. 409.) The plea is therefore bad, but as the declaration has the same defect, the ■demurrer must be…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Porter v. RoseNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Cunningham v. MorrellNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Green v. ReynoldsNew York Supreme Court · 1807
- Miller v. DrakeNew York Supreme Court · 1803
- Wright v. TuttleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1810
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.