Legal Opinion

Kiley v. Baker

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 6, 1942No. Appeal, 220PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Rhodes, J.,

Opinion by

In February, 1941, Helen Brankley entered into a written contract with defendants for the conveyance to her on or before March 1, 1941, of certain real estate. The contract provided that she was to pay the balance of the purchase price on delivery of deed. It is of no significance that the transaction was not consummated on or before the specified date. Time was not made the essence of this contract, and at no time prior to demand by plaintiff for delivery of deed to her did defendants tender a deed to Mrs. Brankley, or make demand upon her for the payment of the purchase…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Tide Water Pipe Co. v. BellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  2. Gray v. Phila. & Reading Coal & Iron Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Lafean v. American Caramel Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1921
  4. Commonwealth v. SmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1942
  5. Schwab v. Miller Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Suchan Et Ux. v. SwopeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  2. White v. New York State Natural Gas CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1960
  3. Sablosky v. Paramount Film Distributing Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
  4. Metzger v. CruikshankSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1947
  5. Adelman v. Lipshutz, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1956

3 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