Jones v. Peterman
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
CASE STATED. This cause, which was an ejectment, was submitted to the Court on a case stated. A certain Jeremiah Hornketh, the younger,- was entitled to the land in dispute, as administrator of his deceased father, Jeremiah Hornketh, under a lease to the latter, dated the 28th November, 1812, for the term of seven years.
Read the full summary
CASE STATED. This cause, which was an ejectment, was submitted to the Court on a case stated. A certain Jeremiah Hornketh, the younger,- was entitled to the land in dispute, as administrator of his deceased father, Jeremiah Hornketh, under a lease to the latter, dated the 28th November, 1812, for the term of seven years. In 1813, Jeremiah Hornketh, the younger, made a verbal agreement with one Jacob Perkins, to demise to him this land, (which was part of a large parcel of land demised to Jeremiah Hornketh, deceased, by W. Hamilton, deceased, for the term of seven years,) for the residue of…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
The defendants have gone to no expense, in erecting buildings, or making improvements on the premises, but rely on the circumstance of possession, to take their case out of the act for the prevention of frauds and perjuries. This, they say, is a performance of the contract in part, and, therefore, within the principle of cases which have been adjudged by this Court. That a performance in part, takes the case out of the act, has certainly been decided $. although it has not been settled, that every performance in part, will be sufficient. Payment of a considerable part of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lessee of Syler v. EckhartSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1808
- Ebert v. WoodSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1807
3Cited by3 opinions
- Parker v. WellsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- Burtch v. HoggeMichigan Court of Chancery · 1839
- Grant v. RamseyOhio Supreme Court · 1857