Burt v. Saxton
New York Supreme Court
Appeal by defendant Saxton, from, a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff on the report of a referee. The action was brought in Wyoming county by William N. Burt against Seth H. Bills, Uriah Saxton, and others, to foreclose a mortgage.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant Saxton, from, a judgment entered in favor of plaintiff on the report of a referee. The action was brought in Wyoming county by William N. Burt against Seth H. Bills, Uriah Saxton, and others, to foreclose a mortgage. In May, 1864, one Seth H. Bills executed and delivered to the plaintiff his bond in the penal sum of $4,000, conditioned to pay .$2,000 as follows, viz.: $500 on the 1st of September, 1867, and the remainder in three equal annual payments from said last-mentioned day with annual interest. To secure the payment of the bond, Bills and wife executed and delivered…
1Opinion of the CourtMullin, P. J.
It is well settled in this State, whatever the rule may be elsewhere, that the time of performance of a contract under seal maybe extended by parol. Fleming v. Gilbert, 3 Johns. 528; Keating v. Price, 1 Johns. Cas. 22; Esmond v. Van Benschoten, 12 Barb. 366; Clark v. Dales, 20 id. 42; Stone v. Sprague, id. 509; Flynn v. McKeon, 6 Duer, 203; Meehan v. Williams, 2 Daly, 367; Newton v. Wales, 3 Robt. 453.
The court in Clark v. Dales, supra, adopts the ruling of the supreme court of Pennsylvania, in Bitzer v. Hahn, 14 Serg. & R. 241, that a new consideration is not necessary to give validity to an *112…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Fleming v. GilbertNew York Supreme Court · 1808
- Esmond v. Van BenschotenNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Keating v. PriceNew York Supreme Court · 1799
- Flynn v. McKeonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1856
- Meehan v. WilliamsNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1868