Suffrein v. Prindle

1 Kirby 112
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1786
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Kirby 112 (Suffrein v. Prindle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Suffrein v. Prindle, 1 Kirby 112 (Colo. Ct. App. 1786).

Opinion

By the whole Court.

The plea amounts only to a traverse of the defendant’s having rum come to hand in January [113]*1131783, sufficient to pay the debt, which is an immaterial fact; if his own did not seasonably arrive, he was, by the terms of the contract, to procure other rum: So that the plea is ill, and judgment must be for the plaintiffs, if the declaration is ' good: To which only it is objected, that the plaintiffs alleged no demand; but this was not necessary; they had right of action without any demand, after waiting a reasonable time for the defendant’s rum to arrive, or other rum to be procured, and npt being notified that it was ready; it was the defendant’s duty to give notice, and there was no lien on the plaintiffs to make demand.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Kirby 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/suffrein-v-prindle-connsuperct-1786.