Cotheal v. . Talmage
New York Court of Appeals
In December, 1848, the plaintiff entered into an agree ment with a company of persons, of whom Gr. T. De Forest was one, by which, in consideration of the sum of $100 paid to him by each of the individuals composing the company, the plaintiff agreed to furnish them with a cabin passage to San Francisco, with subsistence for a year, and with the articles and tools necessary for carrying on mining operations in California.
Read the full summary
In December, 1848, the plaintiff entered into an agree ment with a company of persons, of whom Gr. T. De Forest was one, by which, in consideration of the sum of $100 paid to him by each of the individuals composing the company, the plaintiff agreed to furnish them with a cabin passage to San Francisco, with subsistence for a year, and with the articles and tools necessary for carrying on mining operations in California. On their part the company seveially covenanted with the plaintiff that they would diligently devote, themselves to obtaining gold and other precious metals, in the manner and…
1Opinion of the CourtRuggles, J.
The only question necessary to be con-
sidered in this case is, whether the sum of $500 mentioned in the condition of the defendant’s bond is a penalty to cover such damages as might be proved on the trial, or an amount liquidated and settled between the parties as the compensation to be paid upon the breach of the contract. The ablest judges have declared that they felt themselves embarrassed in ascertaining the principle on which the decisions upon questions like the present were founded. (2 Bos. & Pul., 350.) They have said that the law relative to liquidated damages has always been in a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Smith v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1830
3Cited by49 opinions
- 6 Collier bankr.cas.2d 321, Bankr. L. Rep. P 69,005 in Re United Merchants and Manufacturers, Inc., Debtors. United Merchants and Manufacturers, Inc., Debtors-Appellees v. The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States and John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Seidlitz v. . AuerbachNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Wasserman's Inc. v. Township of MiddletownSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
- Arrowhead Sch. Dist. 75, Park Co. v. KlyapMontana Supreme Court · 2003
- Chaude v. . ShepardNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
44 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.