Lenheim v. Smith
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 165, April T., 1913, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Crawford Co., Sept. T., 1911, No. 3, on bill in equity in case of Florence W. Lenheim and L. H. Lenheim v. Ernest R. Smith et al., Committee of Rose Minium. Bill in equity to reform a deed.
Read the full summary
Appeal, No. 165, April T., 1913, by defendant, from decree of C. P. Crawford Co., Sept. T., 1911, No. 3, on bill in equity in case of Florence W. Lenheim and L. H. Lenheim v. Ernest R. Smith et al., Committee of Rose Minium. Bill in equity to reform a deed. Prather, P. J., found the following facts: . 1. Plaintiffs were the owners of a certain tract of land, situate in the township of West Mead, containing 61.1 acres. 2. While so seized, they entered into a contract to sell the same to .-Ernest R. Smith, reserving therefrom a certain piece of land in the form óf a quadrilateral, fronting on…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Head, J.,
The power of a court of equity to reform a deed or other instrument on the ground that by mutual mistake it failed to evidence the actual agreement of the parties is undoubted. It is a delicate power, however, to be cautiously exercised. To successfully invoke it, a plaintiff must be prepared to show by evidence that is clear and satisfactory not only that the instrument, as it exists, *151does not represent the agreement actually entered into but also that the particular reformation sought will bring it into harmony with what was intended to be done by the contracting parties.…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Armstrong County Building & Loan Ass'n v. GuffeySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- MacKubbin v. Rosedale Memorial Park, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- Witherow v. VlachosSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1960
- Concord Liberty Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Freedman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Lawrence County1973