Todd v. Union Dime Savings Institution
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment. Plaintiff brought this action to recover back purchase money she had paid defendants on an executory contract for the purchase of real property. The contract was for the sale of a lot and premises known as No. 714 Madison avenue, and situated in the city of New York.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment. Plaintiff brought this action to recover back purchase money she had paid defendants on an executory contract for the purchase of real property. The contract was for the sale of a lot and premises known as No. 714 Madison avenue, and situated in the city of New York. Plaintiff sought to recover hack her part payment, together with the expense of a search in relation to the title thereof, upon the ground that the defendant, the vendor, had not such title as was required by the contract and the law, to convey to the plaintiff. The defect complained of arose from the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Potter, J.
[After stating briefly the facts.] No question is made by defendant that the contract
required the defendant to be able to convey to the plaintiff a lawful title to the premises, nor is there any question made by defendant’s counsel that the plaintiff has the legal right to demand a marketable title.
It has been repeatedly held that a title open to a reasonable doubt, or, if after the vendor has produced liis proof of title, a reasonable doubt exists, the title is not marketable (Shriver v. Shriver, 86 N. Y. 575*; Fleming v. Burnham, 100 Id. 1†).
Nor is there contention…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Shriver v. . ShriverNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Sanford v. . EllithorpNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- Beardsley v. DaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Toole v. TooleNew York Court of Appeals · 1889