Cheever v. Smith
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of debt on a bond for the performance of the covenants contained in articles of agreement; and the only question in dispute was, whether the defendants were to be charged with the sum of 5,000 dollars, mentioned in the receipt of the 29th of October, 1814, given by the defendants, Smith and Pardee, to Nathaniel Allen, the agent of the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of debt on a bond for the performance of the covenants contained in articles of agreement; and the only question in dispute was, whether the defendants were to be charged with the sum of 5,000 dollars, mentioned in the receipt of the 29th of October, 1814, given by the defendants, Smith and Pardee, to Nathaniel Allen, the agent of the plaintiff. Smith and Pardee, two of the defendants, the others being their sureties, contracted with Cheever, to supply the forces on the northern frontier, during the late war, with beef. Funds were placed by the plaintiff in the hands of N.…
1Per curiam
We are of opinion that evidence of a mistake in the accounts of Smith and Pardee with Allen was properly rejected. The alleged mistake took place in October, 1814, and in July, 1815, the plaintiff settled with Allen, when there appeared to be due to the latter 4156 dollars and 6 cents, allowing him the 5,000 dollars, in respect of which the mistake is alleged to have been committed. On that settlement the sum of 4,156 dollars and 6 cents, which appeared to be due to Allen, was paid to him.
Now, had the defendants given notice of that mistake to the plaintiff, he would have made the settlement…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Muldon v. WhitlockNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- Davis v. . AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1849
- Schepflin v. DessarMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Berwind v. SchultzDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1885
- Lear v. FriedlanderMississippi Supreme Court · 1871
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.