Legal Opinion

Burnet v. Bisco

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1809PublishedCited by 20 opinions

■ THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration stated, that on the 26th February, 1808, the defendant made an agreement in writing with the plaintiff, whereby she agreed to give the plaintiff the refusal of the farm on which she lived, with the south half of the house, for the term of two years, from the 1st April, 1808, together with the stock, &c. at the following rate, viz. for the first year, 600 dollars, 140 of which to be paid in November, 160 dollars in December,…

Read the full summary

■ THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration stated, that on the 26th February, 1808, the defendant made an agreement in writing with the plaintiff, whereby she agreed to give the plaintiff the refusal of the farm on which she lived, with the south half of the house, for the term of two years, from the 1st April, 1808, together with the stock, &c. at the following rate, viz. for the first year, 600 dollars, 140 of which to be paid in November, 160 dollars in December, and the remainder on the 1st May following. For the second year, 900 dollars was to be paid at the like periods, the…

1Per curiam

A defect in substance in this declaration is, that there is no consideration stated. The defendant agreed to give the refusal of the farm to the plaintiff; but he did not agree to take it, and there was no promise on his part as a consideration for the promise of the defendant, nor any money paid or other valuable consideration given. The agreement was a mere nudum pactum. A consideration is as necessary to an agreement reduced to writing, as if it remained in parol. (1 Sound. 211. note 2.) There must he judgment for the defendant.

Judgment for the defendant?

2Cited by20 opinions

  1. Ide v. LeiserMontana Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Morrow v. Southern Express Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  3. Wardell v. WilliamsMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
  4. State ex rel. State Bank v. HastingsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1862
  5. Coe v. . ToughNew York Court of Appeals · 1889

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API