Legal Opinion

Peyton v. Bowell

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided May 7, 1823PublishedCited by 5 opinions

ERROR to the Clark Circuit Court.

1Opinion of the CourtBlackford, J.

Debt by Bowell against Peyton, on a sealed note for the payment of money. Pleas, 1st, per fraudem; 2dly, failure of consideration. Bowell had Harrodis bond, conditioned for the execution of a good title to a tract of land, fie sold to Peyton, and assigned him the title bond. The note in question was given by P-eyton.ia payment. Yerdict and judgment for the plaintiffbelow.

The instructions which the Court gave to the jury, are assigned for error. So far as those instructions go to state, that an incumbrance on real estate must be of record, or by deed, to, authorize the vendee in refusing a…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. Langford v. FreemanIndiana Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Murray v. FryIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
  3. English v. DevarroIndiana Supreme Court · 1841
  4. Woolley v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1857
  5. Carson v. LucoreSupreme Court of Iowa · 1847

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

Powered by the Exa API