Warner v. Van Alstyne
New York Court of Chancery
This was a bill filed by the vendor of real estate, against the widow and administratrix of the purchaser, and against his infant heirs, to enforce an equitable lien for the purchase money. JL. Doty, who had purchased an eighteen months lease of the property, under an ordinance for flagging one of the streets of the village where the property was situated, was also made a party defendant.
Read the full summary
This was a bill filed by the vendor of real estate, against the widow and administratrix of the purchaser, and against his infant heirs, to enforce an equitable lien for the purchase money. JL. Doty, who had purchased an eighteen months lease of the property, under an ordinance for flagging one of the streets of the village where the property was situated, was also made a party defendant. By the answer of the defendants, it was admitted that the intestate purchased the property from the complainant, for $1000; that $200 of the purchase money was paid, and a bond given for the residue, which…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor.
The complainant not having taken any mortgage or other collateral security for the payment of the balance.of the purchase money which was not paid down, he is entitled to an equitable lien upon the land, in the hands of the heirs of the vendee, for the payment of such balance. (3 Russ. Rep. 488. 1 Tamlyn. Rep. 21. 1 John. Ch. R. 308. 1 Paige's Rep. 20.) As the improvements on the land were made by the purchaser in his life time, his heirs at law have no equitable claim'to have the value of these improvements discharged from the lien of the complainant. Even if the principle…
2Cited by23 opinions
- Fish v. HowlandNew York Court of Chancery · 1828
- Chase v. . PeckNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Brooks v. WoodsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1867
- Hubbell v. . HenricksonNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- Gove v. CatherIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.