Wilson v. Heilman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 168, Oct. T., 1907, by defendant, from order of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T., 1907, No. 87, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Mary Jane Wilson v. J. M. Heilman. Assumpsit for balance of purchase money. From the record it appeared that the plaintiff, by articles of agreement, sold certain real estate situate in East Franklin township to the defendant.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 168, Oct. T., 1907, by defendant, from order of C. P. Armstrong Co., Sept. T., 1907, No. 87, making absolute rule for judgment for want of a sufficient affidavit of defense in case of Mary Jane Wilson v. J. M. Heilman. Assumpsit for balance of purchase money. From the record it appeared that the plaintiff, by articles of agreement, sold certain real estate situate in East Franklin township to the defendant. The defendant refused to make payment on the ground that plaintiff had not a good marketable title in fee simple to the real estate in question. It appeared that plaintiff was…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Elkin,
The correctness of the judgment entered in the court below depends upon the construction of the words used in the deed creating a trust estate for the sole and separate use of Mary Jane Wilson, who at the time of the conveyance was a married woman living with her husband. The deed in express language recites the fact that the consideration paid for the properties was advanced by the father and relatives of the wife, and not by her husband. It is perfectly clear that the intention of the donors was to protect the estate of the wife thus created from the improvidence…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Shapley v. DiehlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1902
- Grimes v. ShirkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1895
- Shalters v. LaddSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1891
- Pifer v. LockeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1903
- Mason v. AmmonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1887
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Kirby's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1912
- Baeder, Adamson Co. v. F. W. Tunnell Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
- Cecil v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Keeley v. Moon, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Bucks County1934
- Pfeifle v. Bethlehem Public Library, Inc., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Northampton County1928