Delacroix v. Bulkley
New York Supreme Court
Error from the superior court of the city of New York. Bulkley sued Delacroix, and declared against him in covenant on an instrument in writing, bearing date 16th February, 1825, whereby (after reciting that it had been agreed between Delacroix and Bulkley, that Delacroix should alter and improve certain premises known as No. 112, Broadway, in the city of New York, in the manner afterwards particularly described in the instrument, and that Delacroix should lease to Bulkley…
Read the full summary
Error from the superior court of the city of New York. Bulkley sued Delacroix, and declared against him in covenant on an instrument in writing, bearing date 16th February, 1825, whereby (after reciting that it had been agreed between Delacroix and Bulkley, that Delacroix should alter and improve certain premises known as No. 112, Broadway, in the city of New York, in the manner afterwards particularly described in the instrument, and that Delacroix should lease to Bulkley the first story of that part of the premises which, after the alteration and improvement, would be south of the hall, in…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Savage, Ch. J.
The only question arising upon the bill of exceptions in this case is, whether the evidence offered shall have been received 1 The law has been understood to be well settled, that a covenant tinder seal, not broken, cannot be discharged by a.parol agreement. 1 Taunt, 430. 10 Wendell, 184, 11 id. 30. It has been supposed by counsel that some cases in this court contain a contrary doo= trine. The case of Fleming v. Gilbert, 3 Johns. R. 530, as stated in the opinion of the court, was upon a bond, the con-*74dition of which substantially was, that the defendant should by a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Suydam v. JonesNew York Supreme Court · 1833
3Cited by35 opinions
- Coe v. . HobbyNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Hume Bros. v. MossIllinois Supreme Court · 1872
- Stees v. LeonardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1874
- Friess v. . RiderNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- O.P.R.R. Co. v. . ForrestNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.