Rinaldo v. Hausmann
New York Court of Common Pleas
On the 26th day of January, 1876, the plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant for the sale of certain premises in the city of New York, at the price of $26,000, to be paid as follows : $2,000 upon the signing of the agreement, $6,000 by assuming a mortgage upon the premises, and $18,000 in cash on the 15th of February, 1876, when the deed was to be delivered.
Read the full summary
On the 26th day of January, 1876, the plaintiff entered into a contract with the defendant for the sale of certain premises in the city of New York, at the price of $26,000, to be paid as follows : $2,000 upon the signing of the agreement, $6,000 by assuming a mortgage upon the premises, and $18,000 in cash on the 15th of February, 1876, when the deed was to be delivered. There were mortgages on the premises amounting to $20,000; and on the day fixed for passing the title the defendant attended at the place designated, with his money, and the plaintiff was ready with his deed, and had…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Brunt, J.
I am aware that the language of the court in the case of Morange agt. Morris (3 Keyes, 48), sustains the defendant’s position in this case. The court says that “ it is the duty of the seller to have the mortgages discharged before the time arrived at which he had stipulated to convey.”
The laying down of so broad a principle was not necessary to a decision of that case.
The case of Hinckley agt. Smith (51 N. Y., 21), is a much later authority, and is in direct conflict upon this point with the case of Morange agt. Morris.
The case of Hinckley agt. Smith lays down the rule that the seller must be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Morange v. MorrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Hinckley v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
3Cited by3 opinions
- Zorn v. McFarlandThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1894
- Cogswell v. BoehmNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Ziehen v. Smith, New York County Courts1893