Barndollar v. Tate
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. UPON a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Franklin county, the case was as follows : Michael Barndollar, the plaintiff below, purchased of one John Musser a tract of land, containing 400 acres, on Bloody Run, and gave his seven bonds in payment, the last of which, for 107/. 2s. 10d. and interest, was payable on the 1st March, 1794. Musser, at the same time gave his bond, dated the 7th March, 1787, conditioned to make him a complete title before the payment of the…
Read the full summary
In Error. UPON a writ of error to the Common Pleas of Franklin county, the case was as follows : Michael Barndollar, the plaintiff below, purchased of one John Musser a tract of land, containing 400 acres, on Bloody Run, and gave his seven bonds in payment, the last of which, for 107/. 2s. 10d. and interest, was payable on the 1st March, 1794. Musser, at the same time gave his bond, dated the 7th March, 1787, conditioned to make him a complete title before the payment of the last of the said seven bonds. On the 13th October¿ 1800, an agreement was executed between Michael Barndollar and…
1Opinion of the Court
Tilghman C. J.
This is an action of covenant on articles of agreement between plaintiff and defendant, in which the plaintiff declares, that the defendant covenanted to procure a patent for 400 acres of land described in the articles, and as*163signs a breach in the'not procuring of the said patent. It' appears by the articles, that the plaintiff agreed to sell to the defendant 80 acres, part of 400 acres of land, which the plaintiff had purchased of John Milsser. The land was not patented, but the plaintiff had Musser's bond, conditioned for the obtaining of a patent on the payment of the whole…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Gower v. SternerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837