Mathews v. Sharp
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Error to the Oourt of Common Pleas of Chester county: Of January Term 1882, No. 8. Covenant, by Joseph W. Sharp against Thomas Mathews, to recover the sum of $500, as liquidated damages for the noncompliance by defendant with an agreement for the sale of real estate.
Read the full summary
Error to the Oourt of Common Pleas of Chester county: Of January Term 1882, No. 8. Covenant, by Joseph W. Sharp against Thomas Mathews, to recover the sum of $500, as liquidated damages for the noncompliance by defendant with an agreement for the sale of real estate. The plaintiff filed a copy of the agreement, which was as follows:— “ It is hereby agreed between Thomas Mathews, of the one part, and Joseph W. Sharp, on the other part, that the said Thomas Mathews doth hereby covenant and agree to sell the tenement and farm he now occupies and owns, in Easttown and Tredyffrin townships,…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Trunkey
The alleged undue influence is not sustained by a statement of what Sharp said and did, nor is it averred that he even knew that Mathews was suffering the effects of intoxication. Nothing appears which could have imposed upon a nervous and excitable man. When a defence of this nature is set up, unless the facts upon which it is founded are given, the affidavit is insufficient. It is -as essential to show the acts resulting in undue influence as it would be, if fraud w$re alleged, to show in what it consisted.
In the argument it was conceded that the refusal of a vendor’s wife to execute the…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Traylor v. GraftonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1975
- Sautter v. RowlandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1925
- Lichetti v. ConwaySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Clements v. Schuyl. R.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
- Orr v. GreinerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.