Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: contract of indemnity contract Court: us supreme court Year: 1826 Page 1 of about 10 results (0.074 seconds)

1826

Armstrong Vs. Toler

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... spread at large upon the record. "the rule of law under which the defendant seeks to shelter himself against a compliance with his contract to indemnity the plaintiff for all sums which he might have to pay on account of the goods shipped from new brunswick for the defendant and ..... introduce these goods into the united states or had consented to become the consignee with a view to their introduction, these circumstances would vitiate the contract. he had already said, therefore, that an interest in armstrong's goods was not indispensably necessary to make toler a participator in the ..... importation or should advance money to b. to enable him to pay those expenses, these acts, the court thought, would constitute a new contract the consideration of which would be sufficient to maintain an action. it cannot be questioned that however strongly the laws may denounce the crime of ..... relation to his own goods." if this opinion be contrary to law, the judgment ought to be reversed. the opinion is that a new contract, founded on a new consideration although in relation to property respecting which there had been unlawful transactions between the parties, is not itself unlawful. ..... them for the owner, a promise to repay any advances made under such understanding or agreement is utterly void. general principle as to illegality of contracts, and distinctions by which it is limited. the authorities on this subject reviewed. inconvenience of the practice of bringing the whole evidence, instead of .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Mills Vs. Bank of the United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... should contain such a formal allegation. it is sufficient that it states the fact of nonpayment of the note and that the holder looks to the endorser for indemnity. whether the demand was duly and regularly made is matter of evidence to be established at the trial. if it be not legally made, no averment, however ..... ebert in order to help the misdescription, and that the case proved was of several liabilities of the defendants, which would not support a declaration on a joint contract. these questions have been fully argued by counsel, but are not presented by the record in such a shape as to enable the court to take cognizance of ..... is no error in this proceeding, since the ad damnum is for a larger sum. in all cases where interest not stipulated for by the terms of the contract is given by way of damages, the sum demanded in the declaration is less than the sum for which judgment is rendered. the plaintiffs may not recover ..... known to the parties, it is to demand payment and give notice on the fourth day of grace, that custom forms a part of the law of such contract, at least so far as to bind their rights. in the present case, the court is called upon to take one step further, and upon the principles ..... negotiated at a bank, whose custom is to demand payment and give notice on the fourth day, that custom forms a part of the law of the contract, and it is not necessary that a personal knowledge of the usage should be brought home to the endorser for that purpose. the general rule of law .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Perkins Vs. Hart

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... the act of hart or by the agreement of both parties, then the plaintiff was not precluded from recovering in this action. nay, further, if the contract was fully performed in relation to any one subject covered by it -- as for example by the sale, collection, and remittance of the purchase money ..... of which agency is too clearly explained by reference to the two preceding letters to leave the slightest doubt as to the meaning and extent of the contract which was thus entered into. the second proposition is "that this special agreement was open and subsisting at the time the cause of action is ..... , perkins writes, on 10 february, 1812, as follows: "my commission on sales made by me, the money collected and remitted, is eight percent. when contracts are made (as is sometimes the case), purchasers make a payment and then give up the land so as to be left without encumbrance to be sold again ..... there was no objection to submitting it to the court to say whether the whole of this written evidence, or any part of it, created a special contract, investing perkins with the agency of hart's land. but we find in this record evidence of a different character, such as accounts, receipts, and depositions ..... wholly performed or if its further execution has been prevented by the act of the defendant or by the consent of both parties, or if the contract has been fully performed in respect to any one distinct subject included in it, the plaintiff may recover upon a general indebitatus assumpsit. a settled .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

United States Vs. Vanzandt

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... in both laws are merely directory to the officers, and intended for the security and protection of government by insuring punctuality and responsibility, but they form no part of the contract with the surety. if, then, the paymaster continues in office notwithstanding the omission of the proper officer to recall him on the ground of his defaults, the act of placing ..... for the security and protection of the government, and to regulate the conduct of those officers; that they are merely directory to the officers, and form no part of the contract with the surety. the correctness of these principles is admitted by the counsel for the defendant, but they insist that they are inapplicable to the case of a surety in ..... to be recalled, and a new appointment to be made in his place, are merely directory and intended for the security of the government, but form no part of the contract with the surety. the statute not removing from office the delinquent paymaster, ipso facto, but only making it the duty of the proper officer to remove him, the circumstance of .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Brooks Vs. Marbury

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... not questioned, nor is the validity of the consideration, so far as it moved from the creditors, infected with any vicious principle or in any manner brought into doubt. a contract the consideration of which is the compounding of felony is admitted to be void, and if this conveyance had been induced by such composition or the promise of it, or .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Governeur's Heirs Vs. Robertson

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... upon the first ground is fatal to the cause of the defendant upon the last, for upon no principle but the assumed nullity of the patent to brantz could any contract be imputed to the state to make good the junior patent, under which the defendant deduces his title. in that case, the land would still have remained vacant land, and ..... state never intends to grant the lands of another, and where the grantee is ignorant of the previous patent, the maxim caveat emptor is emphatically applicable to this species of contract. but to what result would this doctrine lead page 24 u. s. 360 us? a junior grant is to be vested with the attribute of hanging over a valid and ..... imputation of it in the relation between a state and the patentee of its vacant lands? in selling the warrant, the state enters into contract no further than that the purchaser shall have that quantity of vacant land if he can find it. and when the patent issues, it is to the patentee, if to ..... derived under his patent in any case in which an individual would be estopped or might be decreed to convey. but it is only on the ground of fraud or contract that the law acts upon individuals in either of the supposed cases. fraud is not imputable to a government, but if it were, where is there scope found for the .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Cassell Vs. Carroll

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... agreement contemplated a restoration of henry harford to the possession of the province and the payment of large sums consequent thereon, and that, this being a material ingredient in the contract, which became incapable of execution, the agreement ought not to be enforced or held obligatory. it would be a sufficient answer to this objection that the parties, at the time ..... party, but the event in which alone it was to have any effect never has occurred. the payment was conditional, and the condition has never arisen upon which alone the contract could act. but there is another answer presented by the very terms of the agreement itself. it is that the parties expressly agreed that the title to the page 24 .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Etting Vs. Bank of the United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... bank, established at baltimore, his partner in trade, mccullough, the cashier of the branch, and williams, one of the directors of the parent page 24 u. s. 60 bank, had contracted a debt to the bank to the amount of $3,497,700. the directors at philadelphia, in consequence of some information which they had received respecting it, passed a resolution ..... writ of error, the judgment of the court below is to be affirmed. quaere what concealment or suppression of material facts in a contract where both parties have not equal access to the means of information will avoid the contract? this was an action of assumpsit brought in the court below by the defendants in error against the plaintiff in error, etting .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Patterson Vs. Winn

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... in which the means by which an elder title was acquired might be examined if it had been acquired by the violation of principles essential to the validity of a contract, but that a court of equity is the more eligible tribunal in general for these questions, page 24 u. s. 384 and they ought to be excluded from a court .....

Tag this Judgment!

1826

Carnochan and Mitchel Vs. Christie

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Jan-01-1826

..... the sum of 6,583 pounds eight shillings and six pence. the question what was a proper title was for a court to decide under all the circumstances of the contract, and was transferred to the arbitrators by the submission, unless it be withdrawn from them by a subsequent clause of that instrument. the plaintiffs contend that it is withdrawn by .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //