Mansfield v. Redding
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Appeal, No. 198, Jan. T., 1921, by plaintiff, from decree of C. P. No. 3, Phila. Co., Sept. T., 1919, No. 3967, dismissing bill in equity, in case of Charles Mansfield v. Donald V. Redding and Robert Montgomery. Bill in equity for specific performance. Before McMichael, P. J. The opinion of the Supreme Court states the facts. The court dismissed the bill. Plaintiff appealed. Error assigned, among others, was decree, quoting it.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Sadler,
The plaintiff entered into a written contract by which he agreed to purchase certain real estate from the de*359fendants, and to pay for the same a fixed sum within a period of sixty days. Not only was a definite date named for the consummation of the contract, but it was expressly declared that time should be of “the essence of this agreement, unless extended by mutual consent in writing endorsed hereon.” When the agreement was executed five hundred dollars was paid, it being provided that this deposit should be forfeited as liquidated damages in case of default. The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Luther v. LutherSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- MacDougall v. Citizens National BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
- Doughty v. CooneySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- Piro v. ShipleySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1907
- Nulton's AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1883
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Phaff v. GernerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
- Empire Properties, Inc. v. Equireal, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Wasserman v. SteinmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1931
- Levy's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922
- Evelyn v. Raven Realty, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.