Merritz v. Circelli
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Horace Stern,
At least as early as the seventeenth century the High Court of Chancery in England decreed specific performance of an agreement with an allowance of compensation to the plaintiff because of the defendant’s inability fully to carry out his contract: (Cleaton v. Gower, Rep. temp. Finch, 164, (Ch. 1674)). The practice thus born has bécome so generally adopted that it is now a commonplace doctrine in equity jurisprudence, it being firmly established that, where it is not in the power of a vendor to make title to all that he has covenanted to convey, the,vendee…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Welsh Et Ux. v. Ford Et Ux.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
- Millman v. SwanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1925
- Burk's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1874
- Friend v. LambSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893
- Lynch v. PalmerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1921
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Toy v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Payne v. ClarkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
- LaCourse v. KieselSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Portnoy v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
- Roth v. HartlSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.