Steele v. Adams
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
X. HÍS was an action of assumpsit brought to recover the price of seven acres of land. At the trial of this action, upon the general issue, before Putnam J. at May term, 1819, the plaintiff proved that on the first day of July 1816, he conveyed seven acres of land to the defendant, by a deed purporting to be in consideration of two hundred and forty-five dollars, paid by .the defendant, the receipt of which was therein acknowledged by the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
X. HÍS was an action of assumpsit brought to recover the price of seven acres of land. At the trial of this action, upon the general issue, before Putnam J. at May term, 1819, the plaintiff proved that on the first day of July 1816, he conveyed seven acres of land to the defendant, by a deed purporting to be in consideration of two hundred and forty-five dollars, paid by .the defendant, the receipt of which was therein acknowledged by the plaintiff. The counsel for the plaintiff, stated, and offered to prove, that the deed was delivered without the actual payment of any consideration, upon…
1Opinion of the Court
Mellen C. J.
Several objections have been made against the plaintiff’s right to recover in this action, and if either of them be found substantial, the nonsuit must be confirmed.
In the first place it is contended by the defendant’s counsel, that the testimony offered by the plaintiff and rejected by the Judge is inadmissible according to the principles laid down in the case of Stackpole v. Arnold, 11 Mass. 27; as going either to contradict or to explain a written contract, under seal.
We are not satisfied that this falls within the reasoning and principles of that case, or of any others which…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Stackpole v. ArnoldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1814
- Speake & Others v. U. StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1815
- Davenport v. MasonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
- Shephard v. LittleNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Jackson ex dem. Putnam v. BowenNew York Supreme Court · 1803
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dennett v. DennettSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1862