Perkins v. Rogers
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of covenant broken. The declaration was substantially as follows: That on the 3rd day of March, 1843, at Salem, by a certain indenture then and there made between the plaintiff, on the one part, and the defendants, on the other part, the plaintiff did demise, lease and to farm let unto Henry C. Rogers, [one of the defendants,] his the plaintiff’s farm in said Salem, called the Wood-bridge farm, for the term of one year from the first day of April, 1843,…
Read the full summary
This was an action of covenant broken. The declaration was substantially as follows: That on the 3rd day of March, 1843, at Salem, by a certain indenture then and there made between the plaintiff, on the one part, and the defendants, on the other part, the plaintiff did demise, lease and to farm let unto Henry C. Rogers, [one of the defendants,] his the plaintiff’s farm in said Salem, called the Wood-bridge farm, for the term of one year from the first day of April, 1843, for the rent of 300 dollars, to be paid on or before the expiration of said year-225 dollars in cash, and the remaining 75…
1Opinion of the Court
Church, Ch. J.
This is an action of covenant broken. The plaintiff in his declaration sets out the terms of the covenants on the defendants’ part, and then proceeds to allege *85a breach of them; but without averring the performance of a condition precedent, by himself, connected with the defendants' covenant to pay seventy-five dollars of the rent in betterments and improvements on the farm, such as said Perkins, the plaintiff, should direct. The plaintiff, in fact, did not complain of any other breach of covenant than this.
The defendants pleaded performance in bar of the action, and averred…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bernier v. National Fence Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Young v. StephensMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
- Philbrook v. BurgessSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1863
- Jameson v. Androscoggin R. R.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1864