Case ID: ny-sup-ct_9/html/0376-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

JOHN E. HUBBELL, Respondent, v. PAULINE VON SCHOENING and EMIL VON SCHOENING, Appellants.
    
      Contract — specific performance of— Bights of party when time is not of essence of.
    
    A party may be held to a strict performance of a contract as to time, and be put in default for non-performance; but to do this, the party seeking to put the other in default, must not only be ready and willing to perform, but he must tender performance at the time, and demand performance of the other party.
    When time is not of the essence of a contract, a party cannot be barred of his rights, without notice to perform in a specified reasonable time.
    
    Appeal from a judgment directing specific performance of a contract. This ease is reported in 58 Barbour, 498, and 49 New York, 326; and the court, being of opinion that the facts developed on the last trial were substantially the same as on the former one, affirmed the judgment below.
    
      Ira D. Warren, for the appellants.
    
      John E. Parsons, for the respondent.
    
      
       Myers v. De Mier, 52 N. Y., 647.
    
   Opinion by Brady, J.

Davis, P. J., and Daniels, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed.