Reynolds v. Dunkirk & State Line Railroad
New York Supreme Court
Action to recover the price of land sold. The road of the defendants was located' across the farm of the plaintiff, and in February, 1851, the president of the railroad company, who had authority to negotiate for, and purchase, the right of way, appli7 ed to the plaintiff to purchase the land necessary for the road across his farm. The plaintiff asked $2000 for the right of way.
Read the full summary
Action to recover the price of land sold. The road of the defendants was located' across the farm of the plaintiff, and in February, 1851, the president of the railroad company, who had authority to negotiate for, and purchase, the right of way, appli7 ed to the plaintiff to purchase the land necessary for the road across his farm. The plaintiff asked $2000 for the right of way. The president objected to this price, hut told the plaintiff that the railroad company must have the land and must go upon it, and if the plaintiff insisted upon that sum he must have it, but he did not think the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Marvin, P. J.
No written contract was ever entered into between the parties, touching the sale and purchase of the land. Parol negotiations were had, but the parties did not come to any agreement as to the price. The. plaintiff fixed his price, and the agent of the defendants said that they would be obliged to pay it, if he would take no less, and paid to the plaintiff $150 on account of the land, and took possession of it. The plaintiff subsequently tendered a deed. This is stating the case as strongly for the plaintiff as the facts will justify. *616Assuming that the evidence was…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Ontario Bank v. RootNew York Court of Chancery · 1831
- Gibbs v. NashNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by2 opinions
- 300 West End Avenue Corp. v. WarnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
- DeBeerski v. PaigeNew York Supreme Court · 1866