Swift v. Hopkins

13 Johns. 313
New York Supreme Court·Decided August 15, 1816·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Unless the contractor shows distinctly that, in making the contract, he expressly, or ostensibly, acted as a public agent, it must be deemed a private contract* The return does not show that Swift assumed to act- in ,an official capacity when he made this contract: and the reason assigned by him for refusing to pay, was, that he could not make a charge of it against the government, is decisive to show that it was a private contract.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Swift v. Hopkins, 13 Johns. 313 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1816).

13 Johns. 313 (Swift v. Hopkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Angell
11 F. 34 (D. New Hampshire, 1881)
Moore v. Magee & Ware
48 Miss. 567 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1873)