Grimes v. Goud

CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
Writing for the CourtPER CURIAM.
Citation10 A. 116
PartiesGRIMES v. GOUD.
Decision Date06 June 1887
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 After the testimony for the plaintiff was closed, the case was withdrawn from the jury, and reported to the law court, with the stipulation that, if the action was maintainable, the case should stand for trial; otherwise a nonsuit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.

---------------

Notes:

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

---------------

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 practice notes
  • Portner v. Tanner, 1060
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 17 Julio 1923
    ...A. 772; Jones v. Mississippi Farms C., 76 So. 880; Glock v. Howard & Wilson Co., 55 P. 713; Downey v. Riggs, 70 N.W. 1091; Grimes v. Goud, 10 A. 116.) Remedies for a breach are as binding as a stipulation for performance in a contract. (Cresswell Co. v. Martindale, 63 F. 84; 11 C. C. A. 33.......
  • Butler v. Cortner
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 9 Marzo 1926
    ...v. Morgan, 6 Gray (Mass.), 412; Haynes v. Hart, 42 Barb. (N. Y.) 58; Hillyard v. Banchor, 85 Kan. 516, 118 P. 67; Grimes v. Goud (Me.), 10 A. 116; Scott v. Lewis, 177 Mo.App. 8, 163 S.W. 265; Peterson v. Bunting, 43 Cal.App. 707, 185 P. 508; Fresno Irr. Farms Co. v. Canupis, 39 Cal.App. 184......
  • Miller v. Fletcher Savings and Trust Company, 11,025
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • 2 Diciembre 1921
    ...Co. (1898), 123 Cal. 1, 55 P. 713, 43 L.R.A. 199, 69 Am. St. 17; Hanschild v. Stafford (1868), 25 Iowa 428; Grimes v. Goud (1887), (Me.) 10 A. 116; Weymouth v. McLellan (1837), 14 Me. 214; Frost v. Frost (1834), 11 Me. 235; Rounds v. Baxter (1827), 4 Me. 454; Davis v. Hall (1879), 52 Md. 67......
  • Levine v. Reynolds.
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • 5 Agosto 1947
    ...v. Baxter, 4 Me. 454; Frost v. Frost, 11 Me. 235; Weymouth v. McLellan, 14 Me. 214; Appleton v. Chase, 19 Me. 74; Grimes v. Goud, Me., 10 A. 116. These cases were contracts involving the sale of real estate. But in Brown v. Haynes, 52 Me. 578, at page 581, the court said the same rule appli......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 cases
  • Portner v. Tanner, 1060
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 17 Julio 1923
    ...A. 772; Jones v. Mississippi Farms C., 76 So. 880; Glock v. Howard & Wilson Co., 55 P. 713; Downey v. Riggs, 70 N.W. 1091; Grimes v. Goud, 10 A. 116.) Remedies for a breach are as binding as a stipulation for performance in a contract. (Cresswell Co. v. Martindale, 63 F. 84; 11 C. C. A. 33.......
  • Butler v. Cortner
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Idaho
    • 9 Marzo 1926
    ...v. Morgan, 6 Gray (Mass.), 412; Haynes v. Hart, 42 Barb. (N. Y.) 58; Hillyard v. Banchor, 85 Kan. 516, 118 P. 67; Grimes v. Goud (Me.), 10 A. 116; Scott v. Lewis, 177 Mo.App. 8, 163 S.W. 265; Peterson v. Bunting, 43 Cal.App. 707, 185 P. 508; Fresno Irr. Farms Co. v. Canupis, 39 Cal.App. 184......
  • Miller v. Fletcher Savings and Trust Company, 11,025
    • United States
    • Indiana Court of Appeals of Indiana
    • 2 Diciembre 1921
    ...Co. (1898), 123 Cal. 1, 55 P. 713, 43 L.R.A. 199, 69 Am. St. 17; Hanschild v. Stafford (1868), 25 Iowa 428; Grimes v. Goud (1887), (Me.) 10 A. 116; Weymouth v. McLellan (1837), 14 Me. 214; Frost v. Frost (1834), 11 Me. 235; Rounds v. Baxter (1827), 4 Me. 454; Davis v. Hall (1879), 52 Md. 67......
  • Levine v. Reynolds.
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • 5 Agosto 1947
    ...v. Baxter, 4 Me. 454; Frost v. Frost, 11 Me. 235; Weymouth v. McLellan, 14 Me. 214; Appleton v. Chase, 19 Me. 74; Grimes v. Goud, Me., 10 A. 116. These cases were contracts involving the sale of real estate. But in Brown v. Haynes, 52 Me. 578, at page 581, the court said the same rule appli......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT