King v. Smith
Supreme Court of Vermont
Assumpsit to recover tlie price of real estate sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. Plea the general issue, and trial by jury at the June Term, 1859, — Barrett, J., presiding.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit to recover tlie price of real estate sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. Plea the general issue, and trial by jury at the June Term, 1859, — Barrett, J., presiding. The evidence on the part of the plaintiff tended to prove that he resided in the State of Connecticut; that he owned a certain house and lot in Farwell Village, in the town of Randolph, in this State, and a small wood lot situated about half a mile from the house ; that one York, who resided near the premises, was the plaintiff’s agent in reference to this property, and as such agent, about the 6th of November, 1858,…
1Opinion of the Court
Redefield, Ch. J.
The only question in the present case is, whether in a verbal contract for the sale of land the tender of a sufficient deed within the terms of the contract is to have the same effect as the actual acceptance of the conveyance by the vendee ? In the latter case it has been repeatedly held in this State that the vendor may recover the price. This was so held in Hibbard v. Whitney, 13 Vt. 21; Davis v. Farr, 26 Vt. 596; Ascutney Bank v. Ormsby, 28 Vt. 721 ; and in Hodges & Wife v. Green, 28 Vt. 358. In this last case there had been a tender of a deed, and there is an intimation…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hodges v. GreenSupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Hibbard v. WhitneySupreme Court of Vermont · 1841
- Ascutney Bank v. McK OrmsbySupreme Court of Vermont · 1856
- Davis v. FarrSupreme Court of Vermont · 1854
3Cited by5 opinions
- Malzer v. SchislerOregon Supreme Court · 1913
- Niland v. MurphyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
- Pitkin's Admrs. v. City of MontpelierSupreme Court of Vermont · 1912
- Bedell v. TracySupreme Court of Vermont · 1892
- Walsh v. ColcloughCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1893