Rolando v. Zesch
District Court, D. Alaska
1Opinion of the Court
TOMEN, District Judge.
Why the pleader should allege only a part of the “covenant,” the promise to pay, without following the recitals in the lease, and showing that the defendants, lessees, were entitled to a “remittance” of, say, one-half of the amount, we can only conjecture. The provision for this payment, with its partial future remittance, immediately followed the promise to pay at a future date, $1,500 as a penalty or possible liquidated damages, in case of the breach of the covenants to mine in 1926. Is it not therefore likely that the promise to pay the $2,000 was also contingent upon…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Greeff v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- United States v. GratiotSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Ohio Oil Co. v. DetamoreIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
- Raynolds v. HannaU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio · 1893
- Waskey v. ChambersSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smalley v. Juneau Clinic Building CorporationAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
- Smalley v. Juneau Clinic Building CorporationAlaska Supreme Court · 1972