Slingerland v. Morse
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsH. The declaration, stated, that in consideration that the plaintiff had dehvered to the defendants certain articles, viz. two horses, and several articles of household furniture, which were specified, the defendants promised, in writing, to , . , . . - deliver the same in six days, alter demand, or pay 450 dollars.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsH. The declaration, stated, that in consideration that the plaintiff had dehvered to the defendants certain articles, viz. two horses, and several articles of household furniture, which were specified, the defendants promised, in writing, to , . , . . - deliver the same in six days, alter demand, or pay 450 dollars. The plaintiff averred that he did, on the 1st of 'August, 1809, demand the same, and has been, and still was, ready to receive the same ; yet the defendant did not J v deliver or pay, &c. The defendants pleaded non assump- . sd, with notice that they…
1Per curiam
The facts offered to be proved by the defendants would have made out a complete defence. It is very questionable, whether the plaintiff’s own proof was not fatal to him; but the evidence offered by the defendants would have been more full, and have shown the-acts of riie parties with greater precision and certainty.
Two questions arise upon this case ; 1. Whether the testimony given and offered did not make out a valid tender of the goods ; 2. If it did, then what was the effect of such tender and' refusal upon the plaintiff’s right of action ?
1. Here was to he a delivery of cumbersome…
2Cited by19 opinions
- Dunlap v. HuntingNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Des Arts v. . LeggettNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Gans v. WoolfolkMontana Supreme Court · 1876
- McCarthy v. Bowling Green Storage & Van Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
- Gilkeson v. SmithWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1879
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.