Legal Opinion

Bonnet v. Babbage

New York Supreme Court

Decided June 15, 1892PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Action by Andrew C. Bonnet and George Landt against Simon Babbage to-compel specific performance of a contract to convey land. Judgment for defendant.

1Opinion of the CourtDavy, J.

The principal question which arises in this case is whether the defendant should be required to perform the contract referred to in the complaint, as far as he is able, with an allowance to the plaintiffs out of the purchase money for the value of the inchoate right of dower belonging to the defendant’s wife. It is an elementary rule of law that courts of equity will not specifically enforce any contract unless it be complete and certain. It has been held, but not in this state, that where the wife did not sign the land contract with her husband and she refused to join in the deed, that the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Murtha v. . CurleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Roos v. LockwoodNew York Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Merges v. RinglerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  2. Merges v. RinglerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
  3. Minge v. GreenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1912

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API