Graham v. Call
Supreme Court of Virginia
THE controversy in this case turned upon the question, whether a contract for sale of part of a lot in the city of Richmond, by Graham to Means was so complete, and binding on the parties, that a Court of Equity should enforce it on a Bill for specific performance.
Read the full summary
THE controversy in this case turned upon the question, whether a contract for sale of part of a lot in the city of Richmond, by Graham to Means was so complete, and binding on the parties, that a Court of Equity should enforce it on a Bill for specific performance. The Bill was filed by Daniel Call executor and devisee in trust of Robert Means, deceased, against John Graham, stating that, on the 12th of October, 1803, the defendant, for the sum of 200Z. current money, sold to the said Means a specified part of Lot No. 375, and put him in possession ; that Means paid the purchase money, and…
1Opinion of the Court
February 7th, 1817,
Judge Roane
pronounced the Court’s opinion.
The Court is of opinion that, although the Appellant and the Testator of the Appellee had, the one agreed to sell, and the other to buy, the lot in controversy, such agreement was subject to a condition (by the express admission of the hist mentioned party, at the foot of the account among the proceedings,) that the price thereof was to be thereafter agreed upon by and between the said parties respectively: and the said price having never been so agreed upon by them ; and it being now rendered impossible by the death of the…
2Cited by13 opinions
- Virginian Export Coal Co. v. Rowland Land Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
- Edichal Bullion Co. v. Columbia Gold Mining Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1891
- Creek Ranch, Inc. v. New Jersey Turnpike AuthoritySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
- Litterall v. JacksonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1885
- Van Doren v. RobinsonNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1863
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.