From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jenks v. Robertson

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 9, 1874
58 N.Y. 621 (N.Y. 1874)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Jenks v. Robertson, 58 N.Y. 621, the court, without considering the common-law rule that a specialty before breach cannot be discharged by a parol executory agreement, held it sufficient "that the circumstances showed an executed rescission of the contract, * * * upon which ground some of the cases go to escape from a harsh and inequitable application of the doctrine of the common law."

Summary of this case from MacFarlane v. Wardman Real Estate Inv. Corp.
See 1 Summary

Opinion

Argued May 29, 1874

Decided June 9, 1874

Samuel Hand for the appellant.

George Sidney Camp for the respondent.

ANDREWS, J., reads for affirmance.

All concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Summaries of

Jenks v. Robertson

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 9, 1874
58 N.Y. 621 (N.Y. 1874)

In Jenks v. Robertson, 58 N.Y. 621, the court, without considering the common-law rule that a specialty before breach cannot be discharged by a parol executory agreement, held it sufficient "that the circumstances showed an executed rescission of the contract, * * * upon which ground some of the cases go to escape from a harsh and inequitable application of the doctrine of the common law."

Summary of this case from MacFarlane v. Wardman Real Estate Inv. Corp.
Case details for

Jenks v. Robertson

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL JENKS, Respondent, v . DONALD ROBERTSON, Appellant

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 9, 1874

Citations

58 N.Y. 621 (N.Y. 1874)

Citing Cases

MacFarlane v. Wardman Real Estate Inv. Corp.

Its effect is not dependent upon a breach of the contract. In Jenks v. Robertson, 58 N.Y. 621, the court,…

Hennessy v. Village of Pleasantville

By its conceded acts the defendant has prevented the plaintiffs from doing hereafter, if the defendant pays…

3 Citing Cases