Mead v. Case
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was brought upon a contract to recover the sum of $200, which the plaintiff alleged the defendant promised to pay for the finishing of a certain marble inonumenti- „The answer was a general denial. The action was tried at a circuit court in the county of Wayne, in October, 1859, before Hon. T. E. Strong, and a jury.
Read the full summary
THIS action was brought upon a contract to recover the sum of $200, which the plaintiff alleged the defendant promised to pay for the finishing of a certain marble inonumenti- „The answer was a general denial. The action was tried at a circuit court in the county of Wayne, in October, 1859, before Hon. T. E. Strong, and a jury. The proof on the part of the plaintiff showed, fhat in the month of ¡November, 1857, the plaintiff agreed with the defendant to poEslu letter and finish a monument, and set it up for the defendant, for which the latter was to pay the sum of §200j that he, the…
1DissentE. Darwin Smith, J.
(dissenting.) In the conclusion to which my brethren have come, in this case, I cannot concur; and am not quite satisfied to let the decision pass with a simple silent dissent. The statute of 'frauds has been a most fruitful source of litigation. Chancellor Kent said the expense of its explanation might be put down at the sum of a million of pounds sterling, and upwards, in this country and in England. This great amount of litigation and expense has obviously resulted from a departure by the courts from one of the plainest principles or rules for the construction of statutes—to render them…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Waller v. HarrisNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Todd v. Dowd's heirsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1858
- Allen v. JarvisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1849
- Crookshank v. BurrellNew York Supreme Court · 1820
- Downs & Skillinger v. RossNew York Supreme Court · 1840
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.