Legal Opinion

M. & C. Miller v. Bear

New York Court of Chancery

Decided August 27, 1831PublishedCited by 22 opinions

This was a bill for the specific performance of an agreement to convey a lot of land. Samuel Bear was the owner of part of the village plot of Schauyas; and for the-purpose of inducing mechanics to settle there, and thus, to increase the value of his other lots, he agreed to give village lots to several persons, if they would settle thereon as mechanics. Among others, * he gave lot No. 37 to D. Nihart, a carpenter and joiner, who built thereon.

Read the full summary

This was a bill for the specific performance of an agreement to convey a lot of land. Samuel Bear was the owner of part of the village plot of Schauyas; and for the-purpose of inducing mechanics to settle there, and thus, to increase the value of his other lots, he agreed to give village lots to several persons, if they would settle thereon as mechanics. Among others, * he gave lot No. 37 to D. Nihart, a carpenter and joiner, who built thereon. The next year Nihart sold to F. Rathfon, a hatter, who moved on to the lot and carried on his trade there until his death, six or seven years…

1Opinion of the Court

The Chancellor.

There could be no doubt as to the right to a specific performance of the agreement in this case, if all the proper parties were before the court to enable me to make a final decree so as to prevent further litigation. The evidence is abundant to show that Rathfon, at the time of his death, was entitled to a conveyance of the lot from the heirs at law of Bear. And there is no doubt that the conveyance would have been made by Bear, at any time while he was alive and competent to transact business, if it had been made out and presented to him for execution. The objection on…

2Cited by22 opinions

  1. Robinson v. Springfield Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1885
  2. Love v. WatkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
  3. Tate v. Pensacola, Gulf, Land & Development Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1896
  4. Bruce v. . TilsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
  5. Phalen v. . United States Trust Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1906

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API