Hodgson v. Dexter

Citation1 Cranch 345,5 U.S. 345,2 L.Ed. 130
PartiesHODGSON v. DEXTER
Decision Date01 February 1803
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

AN action of covenant was instituted in the circuit court of the county of Washington in the district of Columbia, against the defendant, late secretary at war, by the plaintiff, who was the owner and lessor of a house in the city of Washington, and which was by him leased to the defendant, Mr. Dexter, for the purposes of the war department. The buildings were destroyed by fire, and the plaintiff claimed to recover the value of them from the defendant, in this suit. The lease was in the following words:

'This indenture, made the 14th day of August, one thousand eight hundred, between Joseph Hodgson of the city of Washington and territory of Columbia, of the one part, and Samuel Dexter of the same place, secretary of war, of the other part, witnesseth, that the said Joseph Hodgson, for and in consideration of the sum of four hundred dollars, current money of the United States, to him in hand paid by the said Samuel Dexter, at or before the sealing and delivery of these presents, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, hath demised, granted, and to farm let, and by these presents doth demise, grant, and to farm let, to the said Samuel Dexter and his successors, all that the three story messuage or tenement, erected and built on part of lot number 14 in square number 75, situate on the Pennsylvania avenue in the city of Washington aforesaid, together with the back ground and improvements; running from the said messuage (fronting 26 feet) in parallel lines down to lot number 12, on said square, being the premises next adjoining the messuage or tenement now in the occupation of Mr. Jonathan Jackson, with the improvements and appurtenances thereto belonging, or appertaining, to have and to hold the said demised premises unto him, the said Samuel Dexter and his successors, from the day of the date hereof, for and during, and unto the full end and term of eight calendar months from thence next ensuing and fully to be complete and ended. And the said Joseph Hodgson, for himself, his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, doth hereby covenant, promise and agree to and with the said Samuel Dexter and his successors, that he, the said Samuel Dexter and his successors, shall and may peaceably and quietly have, hold, use, occupy, possess and enjoy the above demised premises for and during the term granted thereof, without the let, suit, trouble, molestation or eviction of him, the said Joseph Hodgson, or his heirs or assigns, or of any other person or persons whatsoever lawfully claiming or to claim by, from, under, or in trust for him or them. And the said Samuel Dexter, for himself and his successors, doth hereby covenant, promise and agree to and with the said Joseph Hodgson, his heirs and assigns, that he the said Samuel Dexter and his successors, shall and will at all times during the said term, keep, or cause to be kept, in good and sufficient repair, the said demised premises, inevitable casualties and ordinary decay excepted; and the same, so well and sufficiently kept in repair, shall and will, at the end of the said term, yield and surrender up to him the said Joseph Hodgson, his heirs and assigns. In witness whereof the said parties have hereunto interchangeably set their hands and seals, the day and year first above written.'

SAMUEL DEXTER, Seal.

JOSEPH HODGSON, Seal.

Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of

John Goulding,

S. Lewis, Jun.

The breaches stated in the declaration were two.

1. That the defendant did not during eight months keep the premises in repair, &c. and hath not delivered up the same in good repair at the end of the time.

2. That the defendant did not keep the premises in repair, inevitable casualties excepted; but the same were destroyed by an evitable casualty, to wit, fire, which was occasioned and took place from negligence, or from the act or acts of one or more evil disposed persons.

To this declaration the defendant pleaded, That on the 8th of November 1800, the premises, against the will and without the negligence or other default of him the said Dexter, were burned and consumed by fire from some cause to him wholly unknown.

To this plea the plaintiff demurred, and the defendant joined in the same.

The defendant also pleaded, 'that on the 15th of May 1800, the president of the United States, for the time then being, in pursuance of authority given to him by law, did order and direct the various offices belonging to the several executive departments of the United States, of which the department of war then was and yet is one, to be removed to the city of Washington on the 1st day of June then next ensuing; and that in obedience to the same order and direction, the various offices of the department of war aforesaid were removed to the said city of Washington on the said 1st day of June, and that thereby it became proper and necessary, that a suitable building should be hired, in which the said offices of the said department of war might be holden and kept, and for this purpose, and for no other purpose whatever, the building, mentioned in the indenture aforesaid, was, by the said indenture, leased to the said Dexter; and that, at the time of executing the writing aforesaid, he was secretary of the department of war, and in that capacity did make and execute the same, and that before the expiration of the said term of eight calendar months, viz. on the first day of January 1801, he, the said Dexter, at Washington aforesaid, resigned the office of secretary of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
35 cases
  • Utah Construction Company v. State Highway Commission
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 13 Marzo 1933
    ... ... against the agent or agency making such contract in behalf of ... its principal. 2 C. J. 812; 46 C. J. 1046; Hodgson v ... Dexter, 1 Cranch 345; Iron Works v. U. S ... Board, 295 F. 415. The State of Wyoming can not be sued ... without its consent. State ... ...
  • v. Scurlock
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 8 Febrero 1954
    ...or local government by reason of such activities shall be considered in determining the amount of the payment.' 10 See Hodgson v. Dexter, 1 Cranch 345, 362, 2 L.Ed. 130; Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp., 337 U.S. 682, 703, 69 S.Ct. 1457, 1468, 93 L.Ed. 1628; Restatement, Agency, ......
  • Coyne v. U.S.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Massachusetts
    • 30 Mayo 2003
    ...federal officials are entitled to immunity from suit on claims based on breach of the government's agreement. See Hodgson v. Dexter, 1 Cranch 345, 363, 2 L.Ed. 130 (1803) ("It is too clear to be controverted, that where a public agent acts in the line of his duty ... his contracts made on a......
  • Providence Engineering Corporation v. Downey Shipbuilding Corporation
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • 5 Noviembre 1923
    ...the contrary appears by satisfactory evidence of an absolute and unqualified engagement to be personally liable.' See Hodgson v. Dexter, 1 Cranch, 345, 2 L.Ed. 130; Garland v. Davis, 4 How. 148, 11 L.Ed. Jones v. Le Tombe, 3 Dall. 384, 1 L.Ed. 647; Brown v. Bradlee, 156 Mass. 28, 30 N.E. 85......
  • 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