Legal Opinion

Frear v. Hardenbergh

New York Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1810PublishedCited by 27 opinions

THIS was an action of assumpsit. Resides a count . , , , , . , , for work and labour, a quantum meruit, and the usual counts, the declaration contained the following count; “ F°r that whereas the said defendant was indebted to t^le sa^ plaintiff, in the further sum of 1,000 dollars, &c. for building: and erecting on the lands and premises. ° of the defendant, two dwelling-houses, two barns, two barracks, &c. and also for clearing, cultivating, and improving two hundred acres…

Read the full summary

THIS was an action of assumpsit. Resides a count . , , , , . , , for work and labour, a quantum meruit, and the usual counts, the declaration contained the following count; “ F°r that whereas the said defendant was indebted to t^le sa^ plaintiff, in the further sum of 1,000 dollars, &c. for building: and erecting on the lands and premises. ° of the defendant, two dwelling-houses, two barns, two barracks, &c. and also for clearing, cultivating, and improving two hundred acres of land, of him the said deiendant, and at his special instance and request, he the saj¿ defendant, in consideration…

1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.

The material objections to the maintenance of the action, urged on the argument, are, that the contract proved is within the statute of frauds, and that it is a nudum pactum.

The 4th clause of the 11th section of our statute of frauds, corresponding with the 4th clause of the 4th section of the statute of 29 Car. II. c. 3. it is contended, renders the promise in this case nugatory. The words *276are, “ that no action shall be brought, whereby to charge' any person, upon any- contract, or Sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or any interest in, or concerning them,” See. One part of the…

2Cited by27 opinions

  1. Society for the Propagation of the Gospel v. WheelerU.S. Circuit Court for the District of New Hampshire · 1814
  2. Owens v. LewisIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
  3. South Baltimore Co. v. MuhlbachCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1888
  4. Forbis v. InmanOregon Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Webster v. StewartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1858

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API