New York Supreme Court, 1805

Whitney v. Crosby

Whitney v. Crosby
New York Supreme Court · Decided May 15, 1805
3 Cai. Cas. 89; 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 442
Whitney v. Crosby

Opinion of the Court

Per curiam.

The first count is good, because certain to a common intent. When a day or month is,mentioned as antecedent, or subsequent to a contract, and the precise day or month is not specified, it means the time nearest to the date of the contract. As the money here, was payable immediately, with interest from the 1st of June, it must mean the preceding 1 st of June. It can have no other interpretation. A further reason why the plaintiff must have judgment is, the demurrer is to the whole declaration, and the second count is clearly good.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.