Walling v. Kinnard
Texas Supreme Court
Error from Rusk. The plaintiff in error, Jesse Walling, sold to O. H. Kin-nard, the defendant in error, a tract of land described by metes and bounds, and purporting to contain one hundred and sixty acres. The price was three hundred and twenty dollars, or at the rate of two dollars per acre, scoured by two promissory notes for one hundred and sixty dollars each.
Read the full summary
Error from Rusk. The plaintiff in error, Jesse Walling, sold to O. H. Kin-nard, the defendant in error, a tract of land described by metes and bounds, and purporting to contain one hundred and sixty acres. The price was three hundred and twenty dollars, or at the rate of two dollars per acre, scoured by two promissory notes for one hundred and sixty dollars each. Walling gave a bond for title with a condition binding himself on the payment of the notes to make to tlie said Kinnard or Mary liis wife a good and lawful title to the land. After 1 he payment of tlie notes it was discovered that…
1Opinion of the Court
Hemphill, Ch. J.
The appellee contends that, as the damages for which he brought suit were unliquidated, this was not a case for tender, and it did not discharge the defendant from costs. This view we apprehend to be erroneous. It is an established rule that when a misrepresentation is made as to tlie quantity, though innocently, the right of the purchaser, if lie does not abandon tlie contract, is to have what the vendor can convey, with an abatement out ■of the purchase-money for so muchas the quantity falls short of the representation. (Mitchell v. Zimmerman, 4 Tex. R., 82; Sugden on…
2Cited by18 opinions
- Okon v. LevyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1981
- Mabardy v. McHughMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
- Wheeler v. BoydTexas Supreme Court · 1887
- Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Vollmer, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1991
- Bourland v. HuffhinesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1922
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.