Hollingsworth v. Fry
United States Circuit Court
In Equity. The bill, after setting forth a variety of transactions between the parties, relative to a tract of land, mills and mill-race, in Dauphin county, stated, that on the trial of a writ of partition for the premises, they consented to withdraw a juror, and entered into the following agreement, dated the 19th of November 1790 : “ It is mutually agreed, that judgment shall be entered for the defendant, on the day in bank, on the 3d of January next, unless the said…
Read the full summary
In Equity. The bill, after setting forth a variety of transactions between the parties, relative to a tract of land, mills and mill-race, in Dauphin county, stated, that on the trial of a writ of partition for the premises, they consented to withdraw a juror, and entered into the following agreement, dated the 19th of November 1790 : “ It is mutually agreed, that judgment shall be entered for the defendant, on the day in bank, on the 3d of January next, unless the said plaintiff, or Robert Ralston, his assignee, shall, previous thereto, by such good and unexceptionable sureties, in such sum,…
1Opinion of the Court
Paterson, Justice.
— The great rule of interpretation with respect to deeds and contracts, is, to put such a construction upon them, as will effec*300mate the intention of the parties, if such intention be consistent with the principles of law. In the present case, there is no difficulty in coming at the intention, as it is clearly and forcibly expressed in the agreement, and is capable of receiving one construction only. The time of payment is made a substantial, and not a mere formal, circumstance ; it enters into the essence of the contract; and therefore, must be observed. (a) The court cannot…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In re ShoemakerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828
3Cited by1 opinion
- Maybin, Surviving Partner, &C. v. Coulon. (A) Coulon v. Maybin, Surviving Partner, &CSupreme Court of the United States · 1804