Christianson v. Linford
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an action to recover possession of a piece of land in the city of New York, described in the complaint. Its boundary line is said therein to begin on a line drawn 110 feet southeastwardly from the easterly corner of Thirty-second street and the Third avenue, at a point distant 34 feet 1 inch northeastwardly from the northeasterly line of such street; and to run therefrom southeastwardly and parallel to such street" four inches and a half; thence northeastwardly 48…
Read the full summary
This was an action to recover possession of a piece of land in the city of New York, described in the complaint. Its boundary line is said therein to begin on a line drawn 110 feet southeastwardly from the easterly corner of Thirty-second street and the Third avenue, at a point distant 34 feet 1 inch northeastwardly from the northeasterly line of such street; and to run therefrom southeastwardly and parallel to such street" four inches and a half; thence northeastwardly 48 feet 8 inches, to a point at the distance of 110 feet one inch and a quarter from the southeasterly side of such avenue,…
1Opinion of the Court
Robertson, Ch. J. The deed executed by the defendant to the plaintiff complied, in all respects, with the written agreement between the parties ; and unless that agreement was also the result of a mistake, which'is not pretended, the defendant has not a shadow of defense on that score. The evidence is overwhelming that the written agreement was the only one made, and that all other transactions in reference to a settlement were mere negotiations and conversations, which were all merged in it. There is not a particle of evidence that the mistake, if any occurred, was mutual; that the plaintiff…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Plumb v. . Cattaraugus Co. Mutual Insurance Company.New York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Otis v. SillNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Tilton v. NelsonNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Outwater v. DodgeNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Lowry v. TewNew York Court of Chancery · 1848
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Friedlander v. Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Supreme Court · 1890