Opinion

Voigt v. Brown

  • 49 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 394
  • 3 N.Y. St. Rep. 740
Court
New York Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 22, 1886
Status
Published
Author
Landon
On the bench
Bockes, Landon, Learned
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Landon, J.:

I concur. The defendant had the capacity to make this contract in New York, where she made it. She had the capacity to perform it in Connecticut, the place of performance. The law of the latter State, in denying to her the capacity to make the contract in that State, did not deprive her of the capacity of performing it there. *397 As she competently made a contract, which it was competent for her to perform, there can be no legal excuse for nonperformance.

As our courts have acquired, in this action, jurisdiction both of the person and of the subject-matter, there seems no good reason why they should not afford redress, and overrule the hypothetical and irrelevant defense, namely, that if this contract had been made in Connecticut, it could not have been enforced.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.