Van Alstine v. Wimple
New York Supreme Court
Indebitatus assumpsit, for land bargained and sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. The declaration also con-the usual counts for goods, work, money, and on an insimul computassent.
Read the full summary
Indebitatus assumpsit, for land bargained and sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. The declaration also con-the usual counts for goods, work, money, and on an insimul computassent. The cause was tried at the Madison Circuit, March 10th, 1824, before Willams, C. Judge, ° On the trial, the plaintiff proved that about 30 acres of land, belonging to him, was, on the 25th September, 1815, sold, at sheriff’s sale, on a fi.fa. against him, upon a judgment in favor of one Hopkins, to one Olcott, on a bid of $42. That after the sale, but before Olcott, had taken a deed from the sheriff, it was…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per Sutherland, J.
So far as the agreement professed to bind the defendant to re-convey the land, upon being re-paid the $200 advanced by him, it was clearly within the statute of frauds, and void at law. It was a contract for the sale of lands and comes within the very *164words of the act. It has been repeatedly held, that if part of one entire contract be void under the statute of fraud,s, the whole is void; that the party shall not be permitted to separate the parts of an entire agreement, and recover on one part, the other being void : and this, although the part which was void, and…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Crawford v. MorrellNew York Supreme Court · 1811
- Simonds v. CatlinNew York Supreme Court · 1804
- Hall v. ShultzNew York Supreme Court · 1809
3Cited by15 opinions
- Moore v. MandlebaumMichigan Supreme Court · 1860
- New England Fire & Marine Insurance v. RobinsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1865
- Harsha v. . ReidNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Robson v. HarwellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1849
- Baldwin v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.