Bean v. Simpson
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Thu action was assumpsit on a contract in writing to deliver certain specific articles to the plaintiff, dated Jan. 5, 1835. The declaration averred a demand of the articles on the last day of May, 1836. No time, or place, for the delivery of the articles was named in the contract.
Read the full summary
Thu action was assumpsit on a contract in writing to deliver certain specific articles to the plaintiff, dated Jan. 5, 1835. The declaration averred a demand of the articles on the last day of May, 1836. No time, or place, for the delivery of the articles was named in the contract. On the back of the contract was an assignment under seal from Bean to one Sherman, dated April 27, 1836. On the first day of May, 1836, Sherman gave verbal notice of the assignment to the defendant, and demanded the articles, but did not exhibit to Simpson the assignment, or give any evidence of it, nor did Simpson…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, after advisement, was drawn up by
Weston C. J.
That the contract, originally given to Bean, was assigned to Sherman, in April, 1836, has been proved, and is not disputed. The defendant,' having had notice the following month, could not subsequently make payment to Bean, so as to defeat Sherman. This was expressly decided in Davenport v. Woodbridge, 8 Greenl. 17.
*51No place was appointed for the delivery of the specific articles, which are the subject matter of the contract. It was then the duty of the defendant, the debtor, to ascertain where the creditor would receive…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Gregoire v. RourkeOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Ross v. Preferred Accident InsuranceHawaii Supreme Court · 1925
- Wiggin v. WigginSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1862