Benners v. . Howard

Superior Court of North Carolina

Benners v. . Howard

1 N.C. 172

DecidedJuly 5, 1800

StatusPublished

This text of 1 N.C. 172 (Benners v. . Howard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Benners v. . Howard, 1 N.C. 172 (N.C. Ct. App. 1800).

Pincite

Opinion

Where a promise is to pay a sum of money, but no time is mentioned, it is due presently, and an action lies without any request. But where, under the like circumstances, a promise is made to deliver goods or to do a collateral act, it is necessary that the party to whom it is to be done should make a demand of the promiser before an action is brought. Though no express promise be made in the present case, the law implies that the borrower should restore in kind the thing borrowed, on request, or pay the value in damages; but, to maintain a suit for the latter, the request is indispensably necessary.

Judgment for the defendant.

(174)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Where a promise is to pay a sum of money, but no time is mentioned, it is due presently, and an action lies without any request. But where, under the like circumstances, a promise is made to deliver goods or to do a collateral act, it is necessary that the party to whom it is to be done should make a demand of the promiser before an action is brought. Though no express promise be made in the present case, the law implies that the borrower should restore in kind the thing borrowed, on request, or pay the value in damages; but, to maintain a suit for the latter, the request is indispensably necessary.

Judgment for the defendant.

(174)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 N.C. 172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benners-v-howard-ncsuperct-1800.