Legal Opinion

Budner v. Haas

Court of Chancery of Delaware

Decided June 25, 1953PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Seitz, Chancellor:

The question is whether a deed given by defendants to plaintiffs should be reformed to include certain land on the grounds either of mistake of one party known to the other or activity amounting to fraud.

The defendants owned a residence situated on a tract of 3.17 acres located on the Washington Street Extension in Brandywine Hundred. In May 1948 defendants decided to sell the residence and a portion of the tract of land. Defendants intended to retain the balance of the land. Plaintiffs responded to an advertisement of sale. Unless otherwise indicated, reference to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Hob Tea Room, Inc. v. MillerSupreme Court of Delaware · 1952
  2. Southard v. . CurleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  3. Colvocoresses v. W. S. Wasserman Co.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 1942

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Demetriades v. KledarasCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1956
  2. Moore v. Home Indemnity CompanySuperior Court of Delaware · 1971
  3. Demetriades v. KledarasCourt of Chancery of Delaware · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API