5 Johns. 74 | N.Y. Sup. Ct. | 1809
delivered the opinion of the court. The pleas are clearly bad, if the payment of the 250 dollars
It has been objected, that the article set forth is a lease, and consequently that the breach, in not letting the premises, is not supported, and that the plaintiff, having committed the first fault, judgment must be against him. It is observable, that though the breach extends also to not giving the plaintiff possession, and not permitting him to enter; yet there are no such covenants in the article. The case, therefore, rests on this: whether the article is a lease in presentí, or an agreement for a lease. Without recurring to the cases
having been concerned as counsel in the cause, gave no opinion.
Judgment for the defendant.