Do It Yourself

Legal Documents


-- Case Briefs --


Civil Procedures

Criminal Procedures


Constitutional Law

--Practice Tests--

Contracts Test 1

 --Answers --

Answers to Contracts Test 1

--Notes & Outlines--


Civil Procedures

Agency & Partnership



The Federalist Papers

Upload Files

New WhiteSmoke 2009

LSAT Preparation


Read WhiteSmoke's Testimonials

Advanced Writing Solution for Professional Results . Limited Time Offer! Get Now!

Whitesmoke all-in-one tool 


Law School Site


Beecher v. Conradt, 13 N.Y. 108 (1855).


Varick contracted to sell some land to Beecher (D) upon the express condition that D pay $396 in equal annual installments. Varick transferred the contract to Conradt (P). Although D did not pay his installment payments, P did not bring suit until the last in­stallment became due. P sued to recover the full contract price. D argued that since the action was brought for the full purchase price, P could not recover without tendering conveyance of the land. The trial court disagreed and granted P recovery of the purchase price. The New York Supreme Court affirmed. D appeals.


Does the fact that full performance by both parties became simultaneously due defeat the independence of the covenant to pay on an installment basis?

Held. Yes. Judgment reversed.

Since D had not sought to recover the separate installments, the parties are in the same situation as though the purchase price were payable at one time. In order for P to recover, he must show, by tendering conveyance, that he is entitled to all of the unpaid consideration; a new trial is ordered.

No time set for either performance. Constructive conditions concurrent will also be implied when no time is set for performance but the promises are capable of near simultaneous performance.


All participants in the study group must always follow the BSL Honor Code.