midpage

Eddy v. GravesEddy v. Graves

New York Supreme Court
Jan 15, 1840
Reporters:
Before:
Cowen
Cowen, J.

By the Court, We are quite clear that neither of the exceptions is well taken. The plaintiff retained the privilege of ‍‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‍sale generally ; and unless he fraudulently sold the goods in such a way as to injure the defendant, the latter must pay for the balance remaining on hand the 10th of September, not exceeding nine hundred dollars. No fraud was ‍‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‍pretended or offered to be shown.

The second exception cannot avail for the reasons assigned at the circuit by the plaintiff’s counsel, apd adopted by the judge, viz: 1. Because there was no consideration for the agreement to postpone; and 2. Because ‍‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‍a contract by specialty cannot be varied by parol agreement, though it be made on valuable consideration. I had occasion to consider the authorities relating to the latter position in Allen v. Jaquish, 21 Wendell, 628, and shall not go over them now. We ‍‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‍wish to be understood as adopting the rule that a subsequent executory contract, in order to operate as a defeasance or modification of a previous contract by specialty, though that be executory, must itself be under seal, whether it have a ‍‌‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​‌​‌‍consideration or not, and whether it be made before or after a breach of the previous contract or not.

New trial denied.

Case Details

Case Name: Eddy v. Graves
Court Name: New York Supreme Court
Date Published: Jan 15, 1840
Citation: 23 Wend. 82
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. Sup. Ct.
Log In