Case ID: johns_7/html/0024-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cobb against Williams.
    NEW-YORK,
    Nov. 1810.
    In an action on a promise to deof boards, at a certain time and place, the that he had*'the timefand^piactq ready, &c. and it was proved, that boards of sufficient quantity and quality were at the place at the time, but not "know dto lonqed ^ií was heid, that the plamtiff was entitled to recover,
    IN error, on certiorari, from a justice’s court,
    
      Williams brought an action against Cobb, before the justice, and declared on a note given him by the de- . fendant, whereby he promised to pay to the plaintiff, 3,200 feet of boards, on or before the 1st of March, 1809, to be delivered at the mill of Fuller Cobb. The defendant admitted the note, and pleaded, that the boards ’ r 7 were ready at the time and place, and still were ready, ... The defendant proved, that boards sufficient in quality , . in,,, , and quantity, were at the mill when the note was due, but the witness did not know to whom they belonged, ^ was Provecb that at the time of the trial, the defendant had boards there sufficient. The iustice gave iudg- . . J ojo ment for the plaintiff, for the amount of the note.
   Per Curiam.

The defendant below put the cause upon the issue of a performance on his part,- and he failed.in proving it. Proving that boards were at the mill, without showing that they were his, was proving nothing; there was no other question raised at the trial, and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed. 
      
      See Newton v. Gulbraith, (5 Johns, Sep, 119.)