Russell v. Slade
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was an action of assumpsit. The declaration stated, That on the 24th of June, 1834, in consideration that the plaintiff, at the special instance and request of the defendants, would labour for the defendants in their woollen manufactory in Norfolk, in the business of spinning, assorting and carding wool, as the defendants might direct, from time to time, during the term of one year then to commence, they, the defendants, promised the plaintiff to pay to him, for said…
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit. The declaration stated, That on the 24th of June, 1834, in consideration that the plaintiff, at the special instance and request of the defendants, would labour for the defendants in their woollen manufactory in Norfolk, in the business of spinning, assorting and carding wool, as the defendants might direct, from time to time, during the term of one year then to commence, they, the defendants, promised the plaintiff to pay to him, for said service, the sum of one dollar per day, during said term, and also to furnish him, the plaintiff, labour at said…
1Opinion of the CourtBissell, J.
1. In regard to that branch of the statute of frauds, upon which the question in this case arises, the rule is certainly well settled, that unless it appears, that the agreement is not to be performed until after the expiration of a year, it need not be in writing. Thus, if it be on a contingency that may happen within the year, but which does nojt actually happen until after its expiration ; the agreement has been held not to be within the statute. Anon. 1 Salk. 280. Smith v. Westall, 1 Ld. Raym. 316. Fenton v. Ernblers, 3 Burr. 1278.
So also it has been repeatedly adjudged, that unless it…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Lent v. PadelfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Lower v. WintersNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Bacon v. PageSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1815
- M'Lees v. Hale & BowenNew York Supreme Court · 1833
3Cited by17 opinions
- Flournoy v. City of JeffersonvilleIndiana Supreme Court · 1861
- Thouvenin v. LeaTexas Supreme Court · 1863
- Lent v. PadelfordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1813
- Wilkins v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1888
- C. R. Klewin, Inc. v. Flagship Properties, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.