Citation network
Withers Vs. Greene
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jan 01, 1850
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 213 (1850) U.S. Supreme Court Withers v. GreeneSearch
-
U.S. 9 How. 213 213 (1850) Withers v. GreeneSearch
-
founded on the total failure of consideration, it has been ruled under the statute of Alabama, in the case of Clements v. LogginsSearch
-
such a one as would not embrace the true character of the transaction. Again, in the case of Wilson v. JordanSearch
-
of other states, in the construction of statutes similar to that of the former state. Thus, in the case of Clements v. LogginsSearch
-
Ala. 514, as late as 1841, the court, by way of illustration, refer to the cases of Buckner v. StubblefieldSearch
-
Wash. 296, and of Hoomes v. SmockSearch
-
supposed to produce in the relative situations of parties to contracts made assignable thereby. In the case of Norton v. RoseSearch
-
The same doctrine was ruled in Pennsylvania as early as the year 1776, in the case of Wheeler v. HughesSearch
-
of reason and justice adopted by modern tribunals when acting apart from statutory provisions. The case of Moorehead v. GayleSearch
-
or partial failure of consideration, the court are led to compare the principle enunciated in the case of Thornton v. WynnSearch
-
with the doctrine as laid down in the State of Alabama under her laws, and with respect to the rule of Thornton v. WynnSearch
-
The earlier case of Peden v. MooreSearch
-
by the Supreme Court of Alabama, of the rules of decision deductible from the law of that state. The action in Peden v. MooreSearch
-
more recent authority only allowing it to go in reduction of damages. The cases of Poulton v. LattimoreSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Barn. & Cress. 259, of Germaine v. BurtonSearch
-
Starkie 32, and Miller v. SmithSearch
-
on discount or on a partial failure of consideration, or a dishonest performance. See the cases of Basten v. ButterSearch
-
of Farnsworth v. GarrardSearch
-
of Denew v. DaverellSearch
-
of Poulton v. LattimoreSearch
-
Barn. & Cress. 259. In the case of King v. BostonSearch
-
could only recover the value, and more having been paid him by the defendant, he nonsuited the plaintiff. Caswell v. CoareSearch
-
of some of the English judges appear to be peculiarly applicable to this view of the subject. Lawrence, J., in Basten v. ButterSearch
-
It would seem, then, to be fairly deductible from the reasoning of the English judges, from the case of Basten v. ButterSearch
-
in 7 East decided, in 1806, to that of Poulton v. LattimoreSearch
-
assert them either for protection, or as a ground for compensation in a cross-action. Thus, in the case of Runyan v. NicholsSearch
-
defense was set up by plea, or after a notice to the same effect given to the plaintiff before the trial. In Beecker v. VroomanSearch
-
produce merely a partial diminution of the value, he may show that in mitigation of damages. In the case of Sill v. RoodSearch
-
represented to be valuable, when in truth it was of no value, is without consideration and void. In the case of Grant v. ButtonSearch
-
done faithfully and in a workmanlike manner. This, too, was the case of a contract for an agreed price. In Spalding v. VandercookSearch
-
In Beecker v. VroomanSearch
-
In the case of The King v. ShakespeareSearch
-
In Attwood v. DavisSearch
-
In the case of Rowles v. LustySearch
-
the commencement of the plea applied only to the messuages and parcel of the land. And in this last case, The King v. ShakespeareSearch
-
and Attwood v. DavisSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Withers v. GreeneSearch
-
of Clements v. LogginsSearch
-
of Wilson v. JordanSearch
-
of Buckner v. StubblefieldSearch
-
and of Hoomes v. SmockSearch
-
of Norton v. RoseSearch
-
of Wheeler v. HughesSearch
-
of Moorehead v. GayleSearch
-
of Thornton v. WynnSearch
-
of Peden v. MooreSearch
-
Peden v. MooreSearch
-
of Germaine v. BurtonSearch
-
and Miller v. SmithSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial