Burnet v. Bisco

4 Johns. 235
New York Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1809·Published·Cited by 20 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A defect in substance in this declaration is, that there is no consideration stated. The defendant agreed to give the refusal of the farm to the plaintiff; but he did not agree to take it, and there was no promise on his part as a consideration for the promise of the defendant, nor any money paid or other valuable consideration given. The agreement was a mere nudum pactum. A consideration is as necessary to an agreement reduced to writing, as if it remained in parol. (1 Sound. 211. note 2.) There must he judgment for the defendant.

Judgment for the defendant?

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

Burnet v. Bisco, 4 Johns. 235 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1809).

4 Johns. 235 (Burnet v. Bisco) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Elliott v. Delaney
116 S.W. 494 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1909)
Spatz v. Singer
116 N.Y.S. 576 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1909)
Ætna Life Insurance v. North Star Mines Co.
56 Misc. 164 (New York Supreme Court, 1907)
Bradbury v. Tarbox
50 A. 710 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1901)
Marietta Paper Mfg. Co. v. Bussey & Carswell
31 S.E. 415 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Morrow v. Southern Express Co.
28 S.E. 998 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1897)
Burbage v. . Windley
12 S.E. 839 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1891)
Ide v. Leiser
10 Mont. 5 (Montana Supreme Court, 1890)
Coe v. . Tough
22 N.E. 550 (New York Court of Appeals, 1889)
Connor v. Renneker
25 S.C. 514 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1886)
Wardell v. Williams
28 N.W. 796 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1886)
Coleman v. Eyre
1 Sweeny 476 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1869)
Moore v. Waddle
34 Cal. 145 (California Supreme Court, 1867)
Vantassel v. Hathaway
53 Me. 18 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1864)
State ex rel. State Bank v. Hastings
15 Wis. 75 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1862)
Dayton, Watervleit Valley & Xenia Turnpike Co. v. Coy
13 Ohio St. 84 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1861)
National Insurance v. Irwin & Co.
1 Disney (Ohio) 430 (Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati, 1857)
Macedon & Bristol Plank Road Co. v. Snediker
18 Barb. 317 (New York Supreme Court, 1854)
Lang v. Johnson
24 N.H. 302 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1851)
Branch Bank at Huntsville v. Steele
10 Ala. 915 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1847)