Norton v. Preston
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
The action was assumpsit. In the first count it was alleged, that in consideration that the plaintiff conveyed to the defendant, April 18, 1834, certain real estate in the County of Penobscot, valued by the parties at $5648, the defendant conveyed to him certain real estate in the ■ County of Somerset, valued by them at $5200, and at the same time agreed with the plaintiff and one A. H. Norton, in consideration of the balance of $448, remaining unpaid in the exchange, to…
Read the full summary
The action was assumpsit. In the first count it was alleged, that in consideration that the plaintiff conveyed to the defendant, April 18, 1834, certain real estate in the County of Penobscot, valued by the parties at $5648, the defendant conveyed to him certain real estate in the ■ County of Somerset, valued by them at $5200, and at the same time agreed with the plaintiff and one A. H. Norton, in consideration of the balance of $448, remaining unpaid in the exchange, to convey to them a lot and store valued by the parties at $2500, on condition that A. H. Norton should convey to the…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court, after a continuance for advisement, was drawn up by
Shepley J.
It is important to understand, what the testimony excluded would have proved, if it had been admitted.
Upon examination, it is found to prove one entire contract for the exchange or conveyance of certain real estate described. There was no agreement for the payment of money; no act was to be done beyond that of a conveyance of real estate from party to party. The case presented, is that of an agreement for the conveyance of real estate, not reduced to writing, but performed in part by each party, and a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Fall v. HazelriggIndiana Supreme Court · 1874
- Elsberry v. SextonSupreme Court of Florida · 1911
- Sauser v. KearneySupreme Court of Iowa · 1910