Trask v. Duval

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania

Trask v. Duval

24 F. Cas. 136, 4 Wash. C. C. 97

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania·Decided April 15, 1821·Published

Opinion

WASHINGTON, Circuit Justice.

The promise stated in the declaration is absolute, to pay when the goods should be delivered, and the amount of freight ascertained. The promise proved is conditional, to pay the freight, if Coucier, the owner of the goods, did not. In the one case, there was no necessity to demand payment of Coucier before the defendant’s liability would arise; in the other, such demand was essential. The variance therefore is substantial, and the plaintiffs ought to be called. Nonsuit.

On motion the nonsuit was set aside, and leave given to amend, on paying costs.

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

WASHINGTON, Circuit Justice.

The promise stated in the declaration is absolute, to pay when the goods should be delivered, and the amount of freight ascertained. The promise proved is conditional, to pay the freight, if Coucier, the owner of the goods, did not. In the one case, there was no necessity to demand payment of Coucier before the defendant’s liability would arise; in the other, such demand was essential. The variance therefore is substantial, and the plaintiffs ought to be called. Nonsuit.

On motion the nonsuit was set aside, and leave given to amend, on paying costs.

Trask v. Duval, 24 F. Cas. 136, 4 Wash. C. C. 97 (circtdpa 1821).

Pincite

24 F. Cas. 136 (Trask v. Duval) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.