R. T. Clark & Co. v. Miller
Mississippi Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtANDersoN, J.
(After stating" the case as above.) It is true, as contended by the revenue agent, that the positive refusal to perform a contract is a breach of it, although the time for performance has not arrived, The Law of Public Contracts (Donnelly), section 304, p. 435; but the mere assertion of a party to a contract that he ivill be unable, or will refuse, to perform his contract is not sufficient to constitute a breach. There must be a distinct, unequivocal, and absolute refusal to perform, treated and acted upon as such by the other party to the contract. A mere assertion of inability to go on with…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Dingley v. OlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Smoot's CaseSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
- Kilgore v. Northwest Texas Baptist Educational Ass'nTexas Supreme Court · 1896
- Adams v. HaiglerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Columbus Ry., Power & Light Co. v. City of ColumbusDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 1918
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Johnston v. StinsonMississippi Supreme Court · 1983