Woodward v. Cowing

13 Mass. 216
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court·Decided May 15, 1816·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Curia.

Where money has been paid upon a consideration which has failed, it may certainly be recovered back by the party who shall have paid it. But such, in our opinion, was not the case before us. There were many risks, equally known to the parties, and which must be presumed to have been considered by them, when making their contract. The return of peace must have been one. The plaintiff purchased a chance to obtain money by captures from an [178]*178existing enemy. The government of their country annihilated that chance, by making such captures unlawful. We have no hesitation in saying, that the defendant has a right to retain the money paid him.

Plaintiff nonsuit.

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

Woodward v. Cowing, 13 Mass. 216 (Mass. 1816).

13 Mass. 216 (Woodward v. Cowing) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boldt v. Baker
13 Ohio App. 125 (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1920)
Hill v. Baker
91 N.E. 380 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1910)
Beckner v. Willson
68 Ind. 533 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1879)
Earle v. De Witt
88 Mass. 520 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1863)
Robinson v. Bright's
60 Ky. 30 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1860)
Cocheco Manufacturing Co. v. Whittier
10 N.H. 305 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1839)