Plummer v. Bucknam
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
On Report. Assumpsit to recover back money paid on a verbal contract for the purchase and sale of a lot of land. After the evidence was all in, the case was continued on report, the full Court to draw such inferences as a jury might, and to enter judgment by nonsuit or default as the law should require. Richardson v. Allen, 17 Maine, 296 ; Gammon v. Butler, 48 Maine, 344; Coughlin v. Knowles, 7 Met., 57; Parker v. Parker, 1 Cray, 409.
1Opinion of the CourtAppleton, C. J.
The plaintiffs contracted with the defendant to purchase of him a lot of land. The bargain was by parol and within the statute of frauds. The plaintiffs paid fifty dollars in part performance, when the bargain was made. Afterwards the plaintiffs terminated the contract, notified the defendant of that fact and demanded the fifty dollars paid, which the defendant refused.
A verbal contract for the sale of lands is void. If a parol contract is made, and fulfilled on the part of the purchaser, and the seller is ready and willing to perform his agreement, no action can be maintained to recover back…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ketchum & Sweet v. EvertsonNew York Supreme Court · 1816
3Cited by6 opinions
- Pierce v. StaubSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
- McKinney v. HarvieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1887
- Johnson v. Puget Mill Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1902
- Perkins v. AllnutMontana Supreme Court · 1913
- Schechinger v. GaultSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.