Strause v. Berger
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 351, Jan. T., 1907, by defendants, from decree of C. P. Schuylkill Co., May T., 1907, No. 1, on bill in equity in case of Samuel Strause v. Elias Berger, William II. Berger and Mahlon II. Boyer. Bill in equity for specific performance. The facts are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court. Error assigned was decree awarding specific performance.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Fell,
This was a proceeding in equity for the specific performance of an oral contract for the sale of a tract of 250 acres of standing timber. The grounds of defense were that no definite contract had been made; that the contract set out in the bill was for an interest in land and void under the statute of frauds; and that there was no jurisdiction in equity because of an adequate remedy at law. The decree in favor of the plaintiff is based on the findings of fact by the court that a sale of the timber was made; that the parties contemplated the immediate severance and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Steinmeyer v. SiebertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- McGowin v. RemingtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1849
- Robbins v. FarwellSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1899
- Byers v. ByersSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1904
- Commonwealth v. StevensSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1897
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Cochrane v. SzpakowskiSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1946
- Pusic v. SalakSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1918
- Morris Brothers Lumber Company v. David E. Eakin, Frances B. Eakin, John L. Eakin, Jr., Also Known as Lester Eakin, and Mary Louise EakinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
- Havens v. PearsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1939
- Schipper Bros. Coal Mining Co. v. Economy Domestic Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1923
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.