Dearth v. Williamson
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. ERROR to the Common Pleas of Mercer county, and a bill of exceptions. George Dearth the plaintiff, and the intestate Janies Welsh, on the 4th June, 1809, made an agreement in writing, “that “ the said George for, and in consideration of the sum of “ three dollars and seventy-five cents per acre, to be paid as “ herein after stated by the said James, has bargained and “ sold unto the said James, his heirs and assigns, a certain “ donation tract of land situated in…
Read the full summary
In Error. ERROR to the Common Pleas of Mercer county, and a bill of exceptions. George Dearth the plaintiff, and the intestate Janies Welsh, on the 4th June, 1809, made an agreement in writing, “that “ the said George for, and in consideration of the sum of “ three dollars and seventy-five cents per acre, to be paid as “ herein after stated by the said James, has bargained and “ sold unto the said James, his heirs and assigns, a certain “ donation tract of land situated in Mercer county aforesaid, “ lying in the second district known by number 184, adjoining “said James’s lot, 1809, on the…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
(After stating the case.) If nothing else was intended by the articles of agreement, than that the plaintiff should re-convey to Welsh the title derived from the commissioners which Welsh was first to procure to be vested in him, then indeed there can be no objection to the plaintiff’s recovery in this suit, because Welsh has the title from the commissioners vested in him already, and it was impossible for the plaintiff to convey what* through Welsh’s default, he never had. The law is clear, that if a man by his own act, prevents me from doing what I covenanted to do in his…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Romig v. RomigSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1830
- Pomeroy v. DruryNew York Supreme Court · 1852
- Defraunce v. BrooksSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1844
- Beach v. SteeleSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1841