Roddy v. Harah
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
May lltb 1870. Before Thompson, C. J., Read, Agnew, Sharswood and Williams, JJ. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Somerset county: No. 66, to May Term 1869. John D. Roddy, on the 1st of April 1868, brought an action of ejectment against William S. Harah.for a tract of 200 acres of land in Upper Turkeyfoot township. The land was known as the “ Cupp” or “Weimer” tract.
Read the full summary
May lltb 1870. Before Thompson, C. J., Read, Agnew, Sharswood and Williams, JJ. Error to the Court of Common Pleas of Somerset county: No. 66, to May Term 1869. John D. Roddy, on the 1st of April 1868, brought an action of ejectment against William S. Harah.for a tract of 200 acres of land in Upper Turkeyfoot township. The land was known as the “ Cupp” or “Weimer” tract. Roddy being the owner of the tract in dispute by purchase from David Weimer, on the 17th of October 1864 conveyed it with other tracts to Grratz and Torry. On the 7th of November Roddy executed a mortgage on this tract to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered,
by Agnew, J.
The court below erred in holding that there could be no conditional verdict, because separate ejectments were brought for the two tracts contained in the contract of purchase. It was rather a singular impression that payment of the whole purchase-money under a conditional verdict in one ejectment would not be payment of the same money in the second, under an entire contract for both tracts. And it was also strange that in an ejectment for one tract the deed required to be made by the plaintiff under the contract for both, must necessarily be…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Clouser v. PattersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1888