Legal Opinion

Swartwout v. Burr

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 7, 1847PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In Equity. The bill in this case was filed to compel a specific performance of a parol agreement, made by Jonathan

1Opinion of the CourtPaige, J.

The facts of this case take the parol cofitract, set forth in the plaintiff’s bill, out of the statute of frauds,- and entitle the plaintiff to a decree for a specific performance of such contract. There is clear and satisfactory proof of the contract for the conveyance of the premises in question, by Jonathan Burr to the plaintiff; and the part performance of the contract is sufficient to take it out of the statute. A part of the consideration money was paid,- possession was taken, and valuable improvements made, under the contract. (Parkhurst v. Van Cortland, 14 John. 15. 2 Caines’ Cas, in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Parkhurst v. Van CortlandCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1816
  2. Sutphen v. FowlerNew York Court of Chancery · 1841

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Liskey v. SnyderWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Dorsey v. HallNebraska Supreme Court · 1878
  3. Williston v. WillistonNew York Supreme Court · 1864
  4. Carter v. GilbertSupreme Court of Florida · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API