Legal Opinion

Reilly v. Magee

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided January 3, 1922No. Appeal, No. 206PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal, No. 206, Oct. T., 1921, -by defendant, from decree of O. P. Allegheny Co., Jan. T., 1921, No. 1213, for plaintiff:, on bill in equity, in case of John D. Reilly v. Christopher Magee, Jr. Bill in equity for cancellation of agreement for exchange of real estate. Before Reid, J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. Decree for plaintiff. Defendant appealed. Error assigned^ inter alia, was decree, quoting it.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Me. Justice Simpson,

Plaintiff and defendant entered into agreements for the exchange of certain properties “on or before August 1, 1919,” stipulating therein that “to accommodate [defendant and his wife] it is desired that a deed from them to [plaintiff] be placed on record at this time” but that so doing “shall in no manner constitute an acceptance thereof by” [plaintiff], whose “only obligations and liability [if the exchange is not effected] shall be to reconvey the legal title to said property” to defendant. The deed to plaintiff was executed and recorded in accordance therewith.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Luther v. LutherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
  2. Scranton v. Scranton Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1917
  3. Clothier v. Hoffman Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Eddy v. Ashley BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  2. Evans v. MOFFATSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  3. Glover v. PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
  4. Evans v. MOFFATSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
  5. Happold v. Espenship, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Delaware County1930

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API