Morton v. Lamb
Court of King’s Bench
101 Eng. Rep. 890 (1797)
- Written by Sarah Larkin, JD
Facts
Lamb (defendant) had agreed to sell Morton (plaintiff) corn. The parties intended that Morton would pay for the corn when Lamb delivered it. Lamb did not deliver the corn to Morton on the date the parties had agreed upon. Lamb argued that he was not satisfied that Morton would have paid for the corn upon delivery.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kenyon, C.J.)
Concurrence (Grose, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.