Legal Opinion

Clark v. Smith

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 1817PublishedCited by 6 opinions

IN ERROR to the court of common pleas, of the county Of Cayuga. The defendant in error brought an action of assumpsit, *n the court below, against the plaintiff in error, and declared for work and labour, and on a special agreement, by which he undertook to take charge of the brick yard of the defendant below, the plaintiff in error, and to make a certain quantity of . r . . - , J bricks, for which he was to receive from the defendant below 80 dollars.

Read the full summary

IN ERROR to the court of common pleas, of the county Of Cayuga. The defendant in error brought an action of assumpsit, *n the court below, against the plaintiff in error, and declared for work and labour, and on a special agreement, by which he undertook to take charge of the brick yard of the defendant below, the plaintiff in error, and to make a certain quantity of . r . . - , J bricks, for which he was to receive from the defendant below 80 dollars. The agreement, as set forth in the -declaration, ° 7 % 1 contained a variety of stipulations which it is unnecessary to repeat. At the trial…

1Per curiam

The question in this case arises upon a bill "of exceptions duly taken to the decision of the court below. Thé declaration in the cause contained the common counts for worir. *327labour, and services, and a count upon a special agreement in relation to the same services. On the trial, the plaintiffs below did not produce the special agreement, but attempted to show it was lost, and failing to prove the loss of the agreement, the court permitted him to go into evidence under the general counts. This was not admissible; there was no pretence, on the part of the plaintiff, that the special contract…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Fuller v. HubbardNew York Supreme Court · 1826
  2. Ladue v. SeymourNew York Supreme Court · 1840
  3. Ala. & Tenn. Rivers Railroad v. NaborsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1861
  4. Suber v. PullinSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1870
  5. Mitchell v. GileSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API