Carman v. . Pultz
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from the 'Supreme Court. Action upon a promissory note, set out in the complaint as follows: “ $500. Po’keepsie, Aug. 20, 1853. On the first day of May, next, we, or either of us, promise to pay Charles Carman, or order, five hundred dollars, value received. “H. F. Pultz. “ Henry E. Power.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from the 'Supreme Court. Action upon a promissory note, set out in the complaint as follows: “ $500. Po’keepsie, Aug. 20, 1853. On the first day of May, next, we, or either of us, promise to pay Charles Carman, or order, five hundred dollars, value received. “H. F. Pultz. “ Henry E. Power.” The answer admitted the execution of the note, but averred that it was given without consideration; that on the day of the execution of the note, the parties to the action entered into a ‘contract, by which the plaintiff agreed to sell to the defendants certain parcels of land in the county of…
1Opinion of the CourtSelden, J.
By the contract between these parties, the defendants, Pultz and Power, agreed to pay to the plaintiff the sum of $1,500 towards the purchase money of the land, to be conveyed on the 1st of May, 1854, and the plaintiff, on his part, agreed that upon receiving the said sum of $1,500, at that time he would execute and deliver a deed. There can be no doubt whatever that these are dependent covenants, and that either party, in order to recover against the other, must show performance, or something equivalent to performance upon his own part. The finding, by the referee, that performance of the…
2Cited by42 opinions
- Lawrence v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Halpin v. . Phenix Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Olcott v. . Tioga Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Duffy v. . O'DonovanNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Meyer v. . AmidonNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.