Veazie v. City of Bangor
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Exceptions, by defendants, to the ruling of Apple-___ TON, C. j. Assumpsit to recover for labor, &c., expended upon the' highways in Bangor. The case is stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was drawn up by
Davis, J.
The plaintiff contracted to keep certain roads in the city of Bangor in good condition and repair, for a term of three years, for the sum of $1700 a year, to be paid to him annually. The case is very nearly like that of Allard v. Belfast, 40 Maine, 369, in which the plaintiff made a similar contract, upon which he was to be paid quarterly.
It is evident that the Court, in that case, overlooked the fact that such a contract is clearly divisible, and therefore no payment is required before performance. Keeping the roads in repair, from one quarter…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. RobesonSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
- Smith v. GugertyNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Leonard v. DyerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
- Kettle v. HarveySupreme Court of Vermont · 1849
- Bristol & Kelsey v. TracyNew York Supreme Court · 1855
3Cited by10 opinions
- Levine v. ReynoldsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1947
- Loyal Erectors, Inc. v. Hamilton & Son, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1973
- O'Dea v. City of WinonaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Rockland Poultry Co. v. AndersonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1952
- Combustion Engineering, Inc. v. Miller Hydro GroupDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.