Summary

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Wicker v. Hoppock — Opinion of the Court

If the contract in the case before us were one of indemnity, the argument of the counsel for the plaintiff in error would be conclusive. In that class of cases the obligee cannot recover until he has been actually damnified, and he can recover only to the extent of the injury he has sustained up to the time of the institution of the suit. But there is a well-settled distinction between an agreement to indemnify and an agreement to pay.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Wicker v. Hoppock — Opinion of the Court

Wicker v. Hoppock
It is said that the agreement between the parties 'was invalid because calculated to interfere with, and prevent the fairness and freedom of a judicial sale; and prevent competition, and therefore against public policy.'
The contract was, that the defendant in error should procure judgments against Chapin & Co. for the rent in arrear, levy upon the machinery and fixtures in the distillery, and expose them for sale, and that the plaintiff in error should bid for them the amount of the judgments.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature