Hanna v. Phillips
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester county. This was ejectment by the vendee against the vendor, to compel the specific performance of articles of agreement, for the sale of land-. The defence set up was, the defendant’s being in such a state of intoxication, at the time of the execution of the . contract, as to render him incapable of assent — misrepresentation on the part of the plaintiff, as to the terms and effect of the written agreement — and dissatisfaction…
Read the full summary
Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Chester county. This was ejectment by the vendee against the vendor, to compel the specific performance of articles of agreement, for the sale of land-. The defence set up was, the defendant’s being in such a state of intoxication, at the time of the execution of the . contract, as to render him incapable of assent — misrepresentation on the part of the plaintiff, as to the terms and effect of the written agreement — and dissatisfaction of the wife of defendant, and her refusal to sign the deed. Hanna, on the 29th December, 1853, executed a written…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion.
2Per curiam
— Many of the errors here assigned, proceed upon the erroneous supposition that a written contract for the conveyance of land is subject to the same rules, when sought to be enforced, as a verbal contract is, though the latter is forbidden by the Statute of Frauds. We have carefully considered all the points of this case, and are' of opinion that it was rightly tried in all respects, except in allowing the plaintiff below to recover damages for mesne profit, not limited by the annual rent, nor by any other definite standard. But as the plaintiff is willing to remit $150 of the…
3Cited by3 opinions
- Strauss's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Saler v. LessySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Commonwealth v. GouldSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1912