Case: Graham v. Bickham
Abbreviation: Graham v. Bickham
Decision Date: 1795-12
Docket Number: 
Citation: 4 Dall. 128
Volume: 4
Reporter: United States Reports
Court: Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Parties: Graham v. Bickham.
Judges: 
Pages: 128–129

Head Matter:
*DECEMBER TERM, 1795.
Graham v. Bickham.
Damages.
Unless the penalty for breach of a contract, is a sum, agreed to be paid and received, absolutely, in lieu of performance, damages may be recovered commensurate with the injury suffered by a non-pen'ormunre.
This was an action on the ease for damages, which were laid at 10,000?. in the declaration, founded upon the following agreement, signed by the defendant:
“ I do certify, that I have bought of William Graham 17,344 dollars, six per cents of the United States, to be delivered to me, On the 1st of July next, on my paying to him, on or before transferring the same, the sum of 22,318 dollars in specie. And for the faithful ¡performance of the above agreement, I bind myself, my heirs and executors, in the sum of 1000?., lawful money of Pennsylvania, to be paid to said Graham, or his order, in case the same is not fully complied with by me. Philadelphia, 17th January 1792.”
On the trial of the cause, a verdict was given in favor of the plaintiff, for 1798?. 17s. 7c?., subject to the opinion of the court, on the* question, whether the plaintiff could recover more than 1000?. in an action upon this agreement ?
The case was argued by E. Tilghman and Ingersoll, for the plaintiff,
on the position, that unless .a certain sum is agreed by the parties to be paid and received, at all events, as the measure of damages, the plaintiff may waive the penalty of the agreement, and proceed for damages according to the actual injury. (4 Burr. 2228; 2 Atk. 371; 1 H. Black. 232; 1 W Black. 395, 373; 2 Atk. 190.)
Lewis and Rawls, for the defendant,
insisted, that the contract ought not to be enforced, beyond the meaning and understanding of the parties; which was obviously to fix a sum, as the extent of the defendant’s responsibility, in case of a non-compliance *with his engagement. (16 Vin. [*50 Abr. 301, “ Penalty,” pi. 3, 5, 10.) ^
s. c. 2 Yeates 62.

Opinion:
By the Court.
— The substance of the agreement between the parties was, to buy and sell stock. The penalty was merely superadded as a security for performance ; and not as a sum to be paid and received absolutely, in lieu of performance. The plaintiff is entitled (notwithstanding the penalty) to recover damages, commensurate with the injury suffered by a nonperformance. The judgment must, therefore, be rendered in his favor, for the full amount of the verdict.