Hounsford v. Fisher

1 Wright 580, 1 Ohio Ch. 580
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1834·Published

Opinion

WRIGHT, J.

We think these covenants mutual; the acts tobe done are simultaneous, and the act of each is the entire consideration for the act of the other. In such cases, neither party can sue without first performing, or offering to perform, his part of the covenants: (1 Saund. 320; Doug. 684, 91; 4 T. R. 761; 6 T. R. 665; 2 John. 207; 5 John. 145, 179; 10 John. 203, 209, 266; 3 John. 146; 1 Caines 45; 6 Cowen 624; 12 John. 209; 4 Day 313; 6 Bin. 24; 2 H. Black. 123; 5 East. 107; 8 Taunt. 62; 5 T. R. 409.) The plea is therefore bad, but as the declaration has the same defect, the ■demurrer must be overruled.

Plaintiff had leave to withdraw and amend.

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

Hounsford v. Fisher, 1 Wright 580, 1 Ohio Ch. 580 (Ohio 1834).

1 Wright 580 (Hounsford v. Fisher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Miller v. Drake
1 Cai. Cas. 45 (New York Supreme Court, 1803)
Green v. Reynolds
2 Johns. 207 (New York Supreme Court, 1807)
Dodge v. Coddington
3 Johns. 146 (New York Supreme Court, 1808)
Cunningham v. Morrell
10 Johns. 203 (New York Supreme Court, 1813)
Porter v. Rose
12 Johns. 209 (New York Supreme Court, 1815)
Zerger v. Sailer
6 Binn. 24 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1813)
Wright v. Tuttle
4 Day 313 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1810)