Brown v. McKee
Commission of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the general term of the supreme court of the first department, affirming a judgment rendered at the special term. In the year Í854, one David McMaster was owner in fee simple of a tract of land on the southerly side of West Twenty-fifth street, in the city of New York.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the general term of the supreme court of the first department, affirming a judgment rendered at the special term. In the year Í854, one David McMaster was owner in fee simple of a tract of land on the southerly side of West Twenty-fifth street, in the city of New York. William A. Cummings was also owner in like manner of a lot on the easterly side of McMaster’s property, each being of the same depth, viz., ninety-eight feet and nine inches to the center of the block. McMaster entered into an oral agreement with Cummings at the time above specified, whereby he was to…
1Opinion of the Court
Dwight, Com.
The first question to be considered in the present case is. as to the ownership of the wall as between McMaster and Cummings. Although the agreement that the wall should stand in part on Cummings’ land was oral, yet. when McMaster acted on the faith of it, that which was at first an oral' contract, void by the statute of frauds, became valid in equity, and gave McMaster a right which Cummings could not recall (Rawson v. Bell, 46 Ga. 19). The wall itself, however, belonged absolutely to McMaster. It was composed of his materials and wholly constructed by his labor. Rothing could…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Ford v. . CobbNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Davenport v. New England Mutual Fire InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1850
- Cole v. . HughesNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Gayetty v. BethuneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1817
- Barrow v. RichardNew York Court of Chancery · 1840
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.