Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/10/82/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/10/82/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
Lewis v. Harwood, 10 U.S. 6 Cranch 82 82 (1810)
Lewis v. Harwood
10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 82
Syllabus
A bond in an action upon which it would be necessary to assign breaches and call in a jury to assess damages is not assignable under the statute of Virginia.
Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Virginia in an action of debt upon a bond dated February 3, 1784, the condition of which was that if the obligor should pay to William Whetcroft, his attorney, heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, the sum of £3,000 current money of Virginia, on or before 1 January, 1785, then the obligation to be void.
Provided that if the obligor, on application by the obligee at the Town of Fredericksburg, on or after 1 January, 1785, should pay to the obligee £3,000 in officers' certificates of a certain description or should pay the interest of 6 percent from the date of the bond, on such certificates, if not paid, and should annually and punctually pay the said 6 percent
when applied to as before mentioned, in doing of which the condition of the bond was to be dischargeable by payment of the £3,000 officers' certificates, otherwise the bond was to have its full force and effect.
Upon the pleas of payment and conditions performed, the verdict and judgment below were for the plaintiff.
The defendant brought his writ of error.
