 | Joseph Chalmers France - 1914 - 512 sider
...charter, a party who has had the benefit of the agreement cannot be permitted in an action founded upon it to question its validity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract, the benefit of which he retains." The court must be taken, however,... | |
 | 1915 - 732 sider
...charter, a party who has had the benefit of the agreement cannot be permitted in an action founded upon it to question Its validity. It would be in the highest degree Inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract, the benefit of which he retains.' » * * We cannot believe it... | |
 | 1916 - 1228 sider
...charter, a party who has had the benefit of \ the agreement cannot be permitted in an action founded upon it to question its validity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract, the benefit of which he retains.' " In Savings Bank v. Burns,... | |
 | 1917 - 592 sider
...benefit of the agreeraient cannot be permitted, in au action fouiuled on it, to question its vahdity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit the defendant to rcpudiate a contract, the fruits of which be retains. Pothier, ( I ) cité encore par M. le juge Taschereau,... | |
 | George Folger Canfield, Isaac Maurice Wormser - 1925 - 960 sider
...charter, a party who has had the benefit of the agreement can not be permitted in an action founded upon it to question its validity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract, the benefit of which he retains." What is said in the text is... | |
 | 1898 - 1020 sider
...charter, the party who has had the benefit of an agreement cannot be permitted in an action founded upon it to question its validity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract the benefit of which he retains." Sedg. St. & Const. Law, 73 ;... | |
 | 1879 - 556 sider
...cha— ter, a party wnohad the benefit of the agreement can not be permitted in an action foumled upon it to question its validity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract, the benefit of which he retains." What is said in the text is... | |
 | 1926 - 1636 sider
...statute. And, in construing the Louisiana statute, the court in Kent v. Mojonier (La.) supra, said that it would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a debtor to repudiate a contract the fruit of which he retained; and that the penalty could not be... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1885 - 1206 sider
...Schenck, 5 Wall. ,772 (72 U. 8., XVIII., 556); Pendleton Co. v. Amy, 18 Wall., 297 (80 US. XX., 579). It would be in the highest degree inequitable and...repudiate a contract, the fruits of which he retains. Pine Grove Township v. Talcott, 19 Wall., 666(86 U. S.. XXII., 227). The bonds registered, as in this... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1885 - 1142 sider
...charter, a party who has had the benefit of the agreement cannot be permitted in an action founded upon it to question its validity. It would be in the highest degree inequitable and unjust to permit a defendant to repudiate a contract, the benefit of which he retains." What is said in the text is... | |
| |
Where it is a simple question of authority to contract, arising either on a question of regularity of organization or of power conferred by the charter, a party who has had the benefit of the agreement cannot be permitted in an action founded upon it... 
