Source: https://chestofbooks.com/business/law/Handbook-Law-Of-Contracts/Breach-Of-Concurrent-Condition-Part-4.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 02:42:28+00:00

Document:
morton Cas. Contracts, 398; Anson, Cont (8th Ed.) 302. See "Sales," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 166; Cent. Dig. §§ S91-J,02.
28 Street v. Blay, 2 Barn. & Adol. 456; Syers v. Jonas, 2 Exch. 1ll, 117; Heilbutt v. Hickson, L. R. 7 C. P. 438, 451; Dailey v. Green, 15 Pa. 126; Doane v. Dunham, 65 111. 512; Id., 79 111. 131; Cox v. Long, 69 N. C. 7, 9; Lewis v. Rountree, 78 N. C. 323; Byers v. Chapin, 28 Ohio St. 300; Bigger v. Bovard, 20 Kan. 204; Polhemus v. Heiman, 45 Cal. 573. See "Sales," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 166; Cent. Dig. §§ 391-402.
292 Smith, Lead. Cas. (8th Am. Ed.) 31; POPE v. ALLIS, 115 U. S. 363, 6 Sup. Ct. 69, 29 L. Ed. 393, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 398; Benj. Sales. § 895; El Paso & S. W. R Co. v. Eichel & Weikel (Tex. Civ. App.) 130 S. W. 922 (delivery of machine of less capacity than that contracted for). See "Sales," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 166; Cent. Dig. §§ 391-402.
30 Street v. Blay, 2 Barn. & Adol. 456; Gompertz v. Denton, 1 Cromp. & M. 207; Poulton v. Lattimore, 9 Barn. & C. 259; Thornton v. Wynn, 12 Wheat 183, 6 L. Ed. 595; Matteson v. Holt, 45 Vt. 336; Freyman v. Knecht, 78 Pa. 141; Muller v. Eno, 14 N. Y. 597; Fairbank Canning Co. v. Metzger, 118 N. Y. 260, 269, 23 N. E. 372, 16 Am. St. Rep. 733; Hoover v. Sidener,98 Ind. 290; Merrick v. Wiltse, 37 Minn. 41, 33 N. W. 3; Wright v. Davenport, 44 Tex. 164; ISAACS v. WANAMAKER, 71 Misc. Rep. 55, 127 N. Y. Supp. 346, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 402. See "Sales" Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 179; Cent. Dig. §§ 456-468.
& J. (Md.) 407; Sparling v. Marks, 86 111. 125; Branson v. Turner, 77 Mo. 4S9; Upton Mfg. Co. v. Huiske, 69 Iowa, 557, 29 N. W. 621; Bothby v. Scales, 27 Wis. 626. This rule has been embodied in the Uniform Sales Act (Acts Mass. 1908, c. 237) § 69, (1), (d). And see ante, p. 574. See "Sales," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 288; Cent. Dig. §§ 817-823.
32 Anson, Cont (4th Ed.) 303. See Behn v. Burness, 3 Best & S. 751; Glanholm v. Hays, 2 Man. & G. 257; Bowes v. Shand, 2 App. Cas. 455; Low-ber v. Bangs, 2 Wall. 728, 17 L. Ed. 768; Cleveland Rolling-Mill v. Rhodes, 121 U. S. 255, 7 Sup. Ct. 8S2, 30 L. Ed. 920; Filley v. Pope, 115 U. S. 213, 6 Sup. Ct. 19, 29 L. Ed. 372; Davison v. Von Lingen, 113 U. S. 40, 5 Sup. Ct. 346, 28 L. Ed. 885; People v. Glann, 70 111. 232; Tobias v. Lissberger, 105 N. Y. 404, 12 N. E. 13, 59 Am. Rep. 509; Newhall v. Clark, 3 Cush. (Mass.) 376, 50 Am. Dec. 741; Husted v. Craig, 36 N. Y. 221; Ogden v. Kirby, 79 111. 555; Harder v. Commissioners, 97 Ind. 455; Bell v. Hoffman, 92 N. C. 273; Salmon v. Boykin, 66 Md. 541, 7 Atl. 701. "A statement descriptive of the subject-matter or of some material incident, such as the time or place of shipment, is ordinarily to be regarded as a warranty, in the sense in which the term is used in insurance and maritime law; that is to say, a condition precedent upon the failure or nonperformance of which the party aggrieved may repudiate the whole contract." NORRINGTON v. WRIGHT, 115 U. S. 188, 203, 6 Sup. Ct. 12, 29 L. Ed. 366, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 386. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) '§§ 221, 278; Cent. Dig. §§ 1015-1032, 1207-1218.
33 Daly v. City of Carthage, 143 Mo. App. 564, 128 S. W. 265, in which it is said, per Cox, J.: "If a breach cannot be compensated for in damages, then the covenants are dependent, and must of necessity be so, else there could be no remedy at all." See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 221; Cent. Dig. §§ 1015-1032.
34 Cavanagh v. Iowa Beer Co., 136 Iowa. 236, 113 N. W. 856. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 221; Cent. Dig. §§ 1015-1032.
35 Chanter v. Hopkins, 4 Mees. & W. 399, 1 H. & H. 377, 8 L. J. (N. S.) Ex. 14, 3 Jur. 58, 51 Rev. Rep. 650, per Lord Abinger, C. B. See, also, Dorr v. Fisher, 1 Cush. (Mass.) 271. See "Contracts," Dec Dig. (Key-No.) § 221; Cent. Dig. §§ 1015-1032.
37 Stavers v. Curling, 3 Bing. N. C. 355. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 221; Cent. Dig. §§ 1015-10S2; "Sales," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 250; Cent. Dig. § 709.
38 Bettini v. Gye, 1 Q. B. Div. 183. And see Graves v. Legg, 9 Exch. 709; Behn v. Burness, 3 Best. & S. 756; Watchman v. Crook, 5 Gill & J. (Md.) 239; Maryland Fertilizing & Mfg. Co. v. Lorentz, 44 Md. 218; Grant v. Johnson, 5 N. Y. 247; Knight v. Worsted Co., 2 Cush. (Mass.) 271, 287; Mill-Dam Foundry v. Hovey, 21 Pick. (Mass.) 417, per Shaw, C. J.; ante, p. 566. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 221; Cent. Dig. §§ 1015-1032.
39 Freeman v. Taylor, 8 Bing. 124; Franklin v. Miller, 4 Adol. & E. 599; Tarrabochia v. Hickie, 1 Hurl. & N. 183; McAndrew v. Chappie, L. R. 1 C. P. 70G; Bradford v. Williams, L. R. 7 Exch. 259; Jackson v. Insurance Co., L. R. 10 C. P. 125; Poussard v. Spiers, 1 Q. B. Div. 410; Rioux v. Brick Co., 72 Vt 148, 47 Atl. 40G; West v. Bechtel, 125 Mich. 144, 84 N. W. G9, 51 L. R. A. 791. As to waiver of full performance. District of Columbia v.
A condition precedent may assume the form either of a statement or of a promise.

References: § 166
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 166
 v. 
 § 895
 v. 
 § 166
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 179
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 69
 § 288
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 221
 v. 
 § 221
 v. 
 v. 
 § 221
 v. 
 § 221
 § 250
 § 709
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 221
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.