Poth v. Anstatt
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the District Court of Allegheny county. Jacob Anstatt against Jacob Poth. This was an action of covenant to recover the balance of purchase money of several lots of ground, sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. Both parties claimed under John M’Kee.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the District Court of Allegheny county. Jacob Anstatt against Jacob Poth. This was an action of covenant to recover the balance of purchase money of several lots of ground, sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. Both parties claimed under John M’Kee. The following facts were agreed upon: “ On the 24th of August 1839, Jacob Anstatt and Jacob Poth entered into articles of agreement, by which the former covenanted to grant to the latter, lots No. 69,70 and 71 of John M’Kee’s plan of lots, adjoining Birmingham, &c. Poth agreed to pay to the plaintiff the sum of $600; $100 on the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Huston, J.
(after stating the case.) — The decision of this case is not embarrassed by any question as to dependent and independent *309covenants, or as to whether the defendant in possession can hold possession and refuse to pay the money. The naked question is, whether the deed of M’Kee and wife, by their attorney, Stewart, vested in Clarke a good title to the lots which Anstatt covenanted to convey to Poth. I will say perhaps it was entirely proper to put the case, at this time, on that issue. It seems Clarke was indebted, and his right has been sold on…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Merscorp, Inc. v. Del. Cnty.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2019
- Pennsylvania Salt Manufacturing Co. v. NeelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
- Souder v. MorrowSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
- Hetherington v. ClarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1858
- Duff v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.