Dickey v. Linscott
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Exceptions from the Eastern District Court, Chandler J. presiding. Assumpsit to recover damages for a breach of a parol contract to labor for the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Exceptions from the Eastern District Court, Chandler J. presiding. Assumpsit to recover damages for a breach of a parol contract to labor for the plaintiff. The plaintiff called a witness, who testified that on Nov. 30, 1838, he was present, at, a meeting of the parties, when it was agreed between them, that the defendant should come to work for the plantiff in two weeks from that time, and work for him seven months, which it was calculated would bring it to the next haying time, and that the plaintiff should pay him therefor at the rate of thirteen dollars per month. The defendant did not…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was by
Weston C. J.
It is contended, that the sickness of the defendant, which was the act of God, and his consequent inability to fulfil his contract, does not defeat the right of the plaintiff, to recover damages for the breach. Cases have been cited where, upon express covenants, the performance of which had become impossible, without any fault in the covenanters, they were nevertheless held answerable in damages. These were doubtless all justified, under their peculiar circumstances. But in a contract, for the performance of personal manual labor, requiring health…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Comstock v. Fraternal Accident Ass'nWisconsin Supreme Court · 1903
- Leopold v. SalkeyIllinois Supreme Court · 1878
- Bowie v. TrowbridgeSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Fisher v. MonroeNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1891
- Fahey v. KennedyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.