Legal Opinion

Shaw v. Bayard

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 26, 1846PublishedCited by 1 opinion

In error from the Common Pleas of Jefferson county. Oct. 23. The plaintiffs in this ejectment, commenced on the 22d of March, 1841, gave in evidence articles for the purchase of certain land from them by Thompson, by which a deed was to be made May 1,1840, when the first instalment of $456 25 was to be paid, and like sums on the 1st of May, 1841-42-43, with interest on the two last sums, from August 1, 1841; all of them secured by bond and mortgage.

Read the full summary

In error from the Common Pleas of Jefferson county. Oct. 23. The plaintiffs in this ejectment, commenced on the 22d of March, 1841, gave in evidence articles for the purchase of certain land from them by Thompson, by which a deed was to be made May 1,1840, when the first instalment of $456 25 was to be paid, and like sums on the 1st of May, 1841-42-43, with interest on the two last sums, from August 1, 1841; all of them secured by bond and mortgage. They also gave in evidence a deed for this land from Thompson to defendants, which recited the articles. No further testimony having been given,…

1Opinion of the CourtRogers, J.

On an examination of the articles of agreement, and comparing it with the description of the property for which this suit is brought, it is impossible for us, with the evidence on the record on which we can alone rely, to say that the court erred in directing the jury to find a verdict in favour of the plaintiff. The description is substantially the same, and, therefore, the allegata and probata, so far as appears, agree. Whether the sheriff, on the habere, has given plaintiff the possession of the right tract, we have no means of determining. It is, however, plain, that the right of…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Gring v. Sinking Spring Water Co., Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County1922

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

Powered by the Exa API