Case Name: Hall against Brown
Court: New York Supreme Court of Judicature
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1818-05
Citations: 15 Johns. 194
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hall against Brown.
Judges: 
Reporter: Johnson's Reports
Volume: 15
Pages: 194–195

Head Matter:
Hall against Brown.
Where the possession of a farm, and some other matters in controversy between the parties, were submitted to arbitration, and a sum of money and possession of the farm were awarded to the defendant, who brought an action of ejectment to recover the possession: and it was then agreed that the plaintiff should give up possession to the defendant, and that the defendant should relinquish his elaimunderthe award, and pay the plaintiff' 150 dollars, it was held, in an action on a note given to secure part of that sum, that the note was given on a good consideration, and was valid, the subsequent settlement not being affected by the previous award, and the. parties having authority to vary the rights acquired under it.
THIS was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note made by the defendant, payable to the plaintiff, dated the 15th of January, 1815. The cause was tried before Mr. J. Yates, at the Washington circuit, in June, 1817.
At the trial, the plaintiff proved the note in question. The defendant gave in evidence, that the possession of a certain farm, occupied by the plaintiff, and some other matters were in controversy between the parties, which were submitted to arbitrators, who awarded that the plaintiff should pay the defendant 137 dollars, and deliver up the possession to him. The plaintiff refused to give up the possession, unless compensated for his improvements, and the defendant brought an action of ejectment. The parties afterwards came to a settlement, and it was agreed that the plaintiff should resign the possession of the farm to the defendant, and let him have a barrel of pork, in consideration of which the defendant was to relinquish his claim under the award, and pay the plaintiff 150 dollars. The note in question was given for part of that sum, and the plaintiff delivered the barrel of pork to the defendant. A verdict was found for the plaintiff for the amount of the note, subject to the opinion of the court, on a case containing the above facts.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The only ground of defence relied upon in this case, is the want of consideration for the note on which the suit is founded; and there is no colour for this objection. The note was given upon a fair settlement of a suit pending between the parties, respecting a farm in the possession of the plaintiff, on which settlement, and giving the note now in question, the plaintiff surrendered up the possession of the farm to the defendant.
There having been a previous arbitration between the parties, in relation to some part of the dispute between them, cannot impeach such settlement. They had a right to modify and alter what had previously taken place ; and the giving up the claim of the defendant under the award was one part of the consideration for the plaintiff's surrendering the possession of the farm to the defendant. The plaintiff must, accordingly, have judgment upon the verdict,
Judgment for the plaintiff.