Lessee of Todd v. Pfoutz
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Ejectment for 300 acres of land in .Greenwood township. It was admitted that Benjamin Poultney was seized of the lands in question, prior to the 24th June 1783. On that day he entered into articles of agreement with Leonard Pfoutz, whereby after reciting that Pfoutz had executed to him three obligations, each conditioned for the payment of 13 81. 6s. 8d. on the 1st May 1784, 1785 and 1786, Poultney covenants, that when these bonds are paid, he will procure a patent for,' and…
Read the full summary
Ejectment for 300 acres of land in .Greenwood township. It was admitted that Benjamin Poultney was seized of the lands in question, prior to the 24th June 1783. On that day he entered into articles of agreement with Leonard Pfoutz, whereby after reciting that Pfoutz had executed to him three obligations, each conditioned for the payment of 13 81. 6s. 8d. on the 1st May 1784, 1785 and 1786, Poultney covenants, that when these bonds are paid, he will procure a patent for,' and by a firm conveyance assign over, all his right to 158 acres and 123 perches of land, surveyed in the name of Jacob…
1Opinion of the Court
The court said, that facts had not been sufficiently disclosed, to enable them to form an accurate judgment on the point submitted to them. It was hardly possible to believe, that no communications had passed between the vendor and his representatives, and the defendant, on the subject of their purchase, *for above seventeen years. Had no money been paid or tendered ? Had no further time for payment been [*179 given ? Had no money been demanded ?
The cases in England are not strictly applicable from our local situation. European lands are more stationary, and do not rise so rapidly in value as in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Pugh v. GoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Pugh v. GoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841