Benedict v. Beebee
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Beebee 7 7 u . brought an action against Benedict, before the justice, and dedared for goods sold and delivered, work and labour, money had and received, and also for damages in. not performing a certain contract relative to the possession and improvement of a certain farm. The defendant objected to any evidence as to the contract stated in the plaintiff’s declaration, relative to the farm.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Beebee 7 7 u . brought an action against Benedict, before the justice, and dedared for goods sold and delivered, work and labour, money had and received, and also for damages in. not performing a certain contract relative to the possession and improvement of a certain farm. The defendant objected to any evidence as to the contract stated in the plaintiff’s declaration, relative to the farm. The plaintiff then waived all claim under that part of his decíaration, and stated that he should confine his proofs to the other demands. In the course of…
1Per curiam
The plaintiff having expressly abandoned all claim for damages for a breach of the contract as to the farm, all objections as to the statute of frauds are removed. A promise or undertaking by the defendant to pay the plaintiff for the improvements made by the deienxfant on the land, is not void under the statute. It was so decided by this court in the case of Freer v. Hardenbergh. (5 Johns. Rep. 272.)
The judgment below must be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Lower v. WintersNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- South Baltimore Co. v. MuhlbachCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1888
- Cassell v. CollinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1853
- Jenkins v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
- Moore v. RossSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.