Property · MBE-tested

Cunningham v. Flinn and Another, in Error

1 Blackf. 266·Supreme Court of Indiana·1823·IN

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Cunningham v. Flinn and Another, in Error. THIS was an action of covenant for not conveying real estate. The case required, that the declaration should aver that the purchase-money had been paid before the suit was commenced. This was done;- but the day and place of payment were riot stated. Held, that as the payment was averred to have been made before the commencement of the suit, the averment was sufficient on general demurrer; that the particular day and place of payment, in such a case, are matters of-form; and that their omission can only he objected to on special demurrer. 27 Eliz. — 4 & 5 Anne. — Bowdell v. Parsons, 10 East, 359. — Higgins v. Highfield, 13 ib. 407 . Vide Stat. 1823, pp. 298, 9.