Graham v. Nesmith
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the Chancery Court of Butler. Tried before the Hon. J. W. Lesesne. The bill in this case was filed by the plaintiff against Ne-smith & Snell, the defendants in error, and alleges that on the 9th Feb. 1838, be purchased of Nesmith three quarter sections of land at and for the price of one thousand dollars each, making in the aggregate three thousand dollars, for which he gave him his three notes for one thousand dollars, respectively, the one payable on the 1st…
Read the full summary
Error to the Chancery Court of Butler. Tried before the Hon. J. W. Lesesne. The bill in this case was filed by the plaintiff against Ne-smith & Snell, the defendants in error, and alleges that on the 9th Feb. 1838, be purchased of Nesmith three quarter sections of land at and for the price of one thousand dollars each, making in the aggregate three thousand dollars, for which he gave him his three notes for one thousand dollars, respectively, the one payable on the 1st January 1839, another on the 1st Jan. 1840, and the other on the 1st Jan. 1841; that he received titles to all said land,…
1Opinion of the CourtParsons, J.
It is not the complainant’s object to treat the purchase as an entire contract, and to rescind it because he did not get title to part of the land. Plis bill is not adapted to such relief, nor does he, in fact, now contend for any such thing. *765Two of his notes for the purchase money were, payable absolutely; the third was made payable in express terms* if the title should be made; so that no recovery upon that note could have been had against him, before the titles were completely conveyed. The reason of this difference in the notes is easily understood from the circumstances of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nelson & Hatch v. DunnSupreme Court of Alabama · 1848
- Lucas v. KernodleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1841
3Cited by1 opinion
- Kitchens v. GriceSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925