Bronson v. . Wiman
New York Court of Appeals
This- action was brought upon a contract in writing entered into October 16,. 1845, at Oswego, by which the defendant sold the plaintiffs two thousand barrels of superfine flour, to be the first shipment from his mill, and to be delivered in Troy or Albany, as the plaintiff's should direct, at $4‘94 per barrel, to be paid for in New York funds.
Read the full summary
This- action was brought upon a contract in writing entered into October 16,. 1845, at Oswego, by which the defendant sold the plaintiffs two thousand barrels of superfine flour, to be the first shipment from his mill, and to be delivered in Troy or Albany, as the plaintiff's should direct, at $4‘94 per barrel, to be paid for in New York funds. It was tried before Mr. Justice Gridley, and a jury, at the Oswego circuit, in February, 1850. The plaintiffs proved the making of the agreement: a direction to the defendant on the 20th of October, and another on the 21st of November, 1845, to deliver…
1Opinion of the CourtGardiner, J.
The motion for a nonsuit was properly overruled. The first ground suggested was clearly untenable. The plaintiffs were under no obligation to prove payment, or a tender of payment; it was enough that they were ready at the time and place appointed for the performance of the contract to receive and pay for the flour. (1 Hill, 523.)
The second reason assigned by the defendant in support of the motion was, that the plaintiffs had not shown, that they or Wing were ready to pay for the flour in question; or that they had or could get New York funds for that purpose, at Albany or elsewhere.
As the…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Baker v. Lehman, Weil & Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1914
- Bailey v. PadgettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1915
- Desbecker v. McFarLineAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Finklea v. GarrickSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
- Balheimer v. ReichardtNew York Supreme Court · 1878
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.