Hecht v. Taubel
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On demurrer to the first count of plaintiff’s declaration. The count demurred to is founded upon the following writing, which is annexed to the declaration and referred to in the count as so annexed: “Riverside, Burlington Co., N. J., Aug. 2, 1892. “We the undersine do heare by agree to Wm.
Read the full summary
On demurrer to the first count of plaintiff’s declaration. The count demurred to is founded upon the following writing, which is annexed to the declaration and referred to in the count as so annexed: “Riverside, Burlington Co., N. J., Aug. 2, 1892. “We the undersine do heare by agree to Wm. Hecht the sum of four hundred dollars $400^^- for the receit of fast black on hoisery the black must be as good as the samples he has dyed for us July 15,1892 we will make the allowance of a half a shade in color money to be paid Aug 13 1892 if the color is right. (Signed) “Taubel & Bro.” The count sets…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Magie, J.
The causes of demurrer relied on contain some which raise the question whether the count demurred to sufficiently shows that the money sued for has become due and payable.
The agreement set forth in the first count is evidently one for the payment of money at a specified time, not generally, but only upon the previous performance or happening of conditions precedent.
*421By the provisions of section 126 of the Practice act the pleader may aver the performance of conditions precedent, generally. In the count in question the pleader has specially…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Dimick v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
- Vail v. Pennsylvania Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1901