Jennings v. Camp
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, from the court of common pleas of the county of Madison. The plaintiff’s declaration was in assumpsit, and contained two counts.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, from the court of common pleas of the county of Madison. The plaintiff’s declaration was in assumpsit, and contained two counts. The first count Stated an agreement between the plaintiff and defendant, in the court below, dated the 1st of July, 1812, by v'hich Camp, the plaintiff below, and defendant in error, agreed to log up, burn, and clear, fit for sowing, ten acres of land on a certain lot belonging to the defendant below, the plaintiff in error, in a good, farmerlike manner, by the 20th of September, and to fence the said ten acres with a good rail fence, by the first of…
1Opinion of the Court
Spéítceb, J.,
delivered the opinion of the court*
This case does not present the question, whether, on a failure So prove the special contract, in consequence of a variance between the declaration and the proof, the plaintiff may not resort to the general count; but the point is, whether a party who enters into a contract, and performs part of it, and then, without cause, or the agreement or fault of the other party, but of his own mere volition, abandons the performance, can maintain an action, on an implied assumpsit, for the labour actually performed; and it seems to me, that the mere…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Wolfe v. . HowesNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Norris v. HuntTexas Supreme Court · 1879
- Galvin v. . PrenticeNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Britton v. TurnerSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1834
- Lantry v. ParksCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1827
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.