Rineer v. Collins
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 140, July T., 1892, by defendant, James Collins, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., May T., 1889, No. 17, on verdict for plaintiff, William H. Rineer. Assumpsit for breach of parol contract for sale of land. At the trial, before Livingston, P. J., it appeared that defendant had purchased a farm at a public sale for $1,889.06, and was to pay the purchase money and was to receive the deed on the following 1st of April.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 140, July T., 1892, by defendant, James Collins, from judgment of C. P. Lancaster Co., May T., 1889, No. 17, on verdict for plaintiff, William H. Rineer. Assumpsit for breach of parol contract for sale of land. At the trial, before Livingston, P. J., it appeared that defendant had purchased a farm at a public sale for $1,889.06, and was to pay the purchase money and was to receive the deed on the following 1st of April. Subsequently defendant agreed to soil to plaintiff the farm for $1,964.06, an advance of $75. About a week afterwards defendant gave to plaintiff the following…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Green,
In the court below, and by the counsel on both sides, on the trial, the contract between these parties was treated as a parol contract for the sale of land. The court so described it in the charge, and instructed the jury, as to any right of recovery upon it, that it must be treated as such a contract. No assignment of error here raises any question upon it as a written contract, nor is there any serious contention on the part of the appellee that it should be regarded as a contract in writing for the sale of land. As its essential features could not be established…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mellon v. DavisonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1889
- Bitner v. BroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849
- Harris v. HarrisSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1872
- Soles v. HickmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
- McCafferty v. GriswoldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1882
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Edward C. Rea and 22 Ford Inc., a Corporation v. Ford Motor Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1974
- Fannin v. CrattySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
- Manufacturers Light & Heat Co. v. LampSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
- Seidlek v. BradleySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1928
- Eberz v. HeislerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1900
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.