Grimes v. Goud

• Decision Date: 06 June 1887
• Parties: GRIMES v. GOUD.
• Court: Maine Supreme Court

10 A. 116

GRIMES

v. GOUD.¹

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

June 6, 1887.

On report from superior court, Kennebec county.

Assumpsit on an account annexed for money paid for hay and farm produce sold and for labor performed, amounting to $467.91. On cross-examination, plaintiff admitted that all the items in his account annexed were paid under the terms of a bond from the defendant to him to convey a farm in Whitefield, and in part payment of what was due from him under it. After the testimony for the plaintiff was closed, the case was withdrawn from the jury, and reported to the law court, with the stipulation that, if the action was maintainable, the case should stand for trial; otherwise a nonsuit should be entered.

Spaulding & Buker, for plaintiff. Baker, Baker & Cornish, for defendant.

PER CURIAM. The evidence for the plaintiff disclosed the following facts: The plaintiff had the bond of the defendant for the conveyance of a farm upon specified terms. All the items now sued for in assumpsit were rendered in part performance of the conditions of that bond. The plaintiff failed to complete the performance of the conditions, and by his own act forfeited his rights under the bond. He then brought this action to recover back what he had thus voluntarily paid on a contract afterwards forfeited by himself. It is evident he cannot recover.

It is urged that the defendant, at the time of making the contract and receiving the part payment, believed that the plaintiff would not be able to complete the required payments. Such a belief, however, if established by the evidence, does not enlarge the plaintiff's rights. He was his own judge of his ability. Plaintiff nonsuit.

1 Reported by Leslie C. Cornish, Esq., of the Augusta bar.