Olmstead v. Greenly

New York Supreme Court

Olmstead v. Greenly

18 Johns. 12

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1820

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 18 Johns. 12 (Olmstead v. Greenly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Olmstead v. Greenly, 18 Johns. 12 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1820).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are of opinion that this is not a case within the statute of frauds. It is not a mere collateral undertaking, ,or agreement, on the part of the defendant, to pay the debt of Bristol; but'was an original contract, on an independent consideration, received by the defendant, by the procurement of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the same ground of action as if he had delivered his own goods to the defendant, as the consideration of the promise. (Cartling v. Aubert, 2 East’s Rep. 324.) The plaintiff is, therefore, entitled to judgment.

Judgment for the plaintiff

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

Per Curiam.

We are of opinion that this is not a case within the statute of frauds. It is not a mere collateral undertaking, ,or agreement, on the part of the defendant, to pay the debt of Bristol; but'was an original contract, on an independent consideration, received by the defendant, by the procurement of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has the same ground of action as if he had delivered his own goods to the defendant, as the consideration of the promise. (Cartling v. Aubert, 2 East’s Rep. 324.) The plaintiff is, therefore, entitled to judgment.

Judgment for the plaintiff

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 Johns. 12, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/olmstead-v-greenly-nysupct-1820.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack