Ayer v. Hawkes
Superior Court of New Hampshire
Assumpsit, for use and occupation of the Kimball Place, so called, in Hampstead, from the first day of May, 1838, to the 10th day of December, 1838. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and gave notice of a set-off for money had and received.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit, for use and occupation of the Kimball Place, so called, in Hampstead, from the first day of May, 1838, to the 10th day of December, 1838. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and gave notice of a set-off for money had and received. On the trial, it appeared in evidence that about the first day of May, 1838, the defendant made a verbal contract ■with the plaintiff, to purchase of him the place in question, for the sum of $1200-00. The terms of payment were, $200-00 or 300-00, when he should take possession ; f>500'00 in the summer, and the remainder in two years. The defendant,…
1Opinion of the CourtGilchrist, J.
This is a parol contract for the sale of lands. Consequently it is within the statute of frauds, and no action at law could be maintained upon it.
But it does not therefore follow that the contract is entirely void. A parol contract for the sale of lands is not declared by the statute to be void. It is only provided that no action shall be maintained upon it. Lane vs. Shackford, 5 N. H. Rep. 133.
Nor does the case find that the parties ever regarded it as invalid. On the contrary, they must have considered it as binding upon them, by the manner in which they conducted. The defendant paid the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ketchum & Sweet v. EvertsonNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Harris v. KnickerbackerCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1830
- Gillet v. MaynardNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Bell v. AndrewsSupreme Court of the United States · 1796
- Dowdle v. CampNew York Supreme Court · 1815
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.