Parker v. Parker
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
The defendant then pleads, that he paid the said 800 dollars and interest, according to the tenor of the said condition and note, viz., on the 22d of February, 1811, he, the defendant, then being in possession of the said mortgaged premises, and the said testator having never entered thereon.
Read the full summary
The defendant then pleads, that he paid the said 800 dollars and interest, according to the tenor of the said condition and note, viz., on the 22d of February, 1811, he, the defendant, then being in possession of the said mortgaged premises, and the said testator having never entered thereon. The plaintiff then offered to prove that the defendant never gave a note for 800 dollars, as described in the deed; but that, at the time when the deed was made, it was intended and expected by the testator and the defendant (who was the testator’s son), that the former should lend to the defendant 800…
1Opinion of the Court
A mortgage deed was made, with condition to be void on the payment cf a certain sum on a day mentioned, the year being left blank, according to the tenor of a promissory note for the same sum. The note was never made, ayd a part of the money only loaned, for which a receipt was given. It was holden that there was no remedy upon the mortgage deed, the bargain being incomplete.
This was an action of covenant broken, on a deed made by the defendant, on the 22d of February, 1810, for the conveyance of certain land to David Parker, the plaintiff’s testator, with a covenant of warranty and the other…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Blake v. TuckerSupreme Court of Vermont · 1840
- Mcnamee v. MorelandSupreme Court of Iowa · 1868
- Whittemore v. ShawSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1836
- Pledger v. EllerbeCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1853