Gormley v. Kyle
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract for money had and received, being the amount paid by the plaintiff as part of the purchase money at a sale by the defendant of land by auction. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Hitman, J., who found for the plaintiff; and the defendant alleged exceptions. The facts appear in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtC. Allen, J.
When the plaintiff’s attorney and the defendant met, on the morning of April 8, 1882, the defendant was in no condition to carry out his contract, and the deed which he tendered would not have conveyed a title which the plaintiff was bound to accept. Without mentioning other supposed defects, there were two outstanding mortgages and an outstanding attachment. The defendant made no offer to discharge these *190incumbrances, as was done in Howland v. Leach, 11 Pick. 151, 155, where it was manifest from the evidence that the vendor could and would have given a good title, and that the purchaser’s…
2Cited by12 opinions
- Lowe v. HarwoodMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Hawkes v. KehoeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
- Mansfield v. HodgdonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1888
- Burk v. SchreiberMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Fort Payne Coal & Iron Co. v. WebsterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.