Fasholt v. Reed
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
IN ERROR. Error to (he Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland county, in an ejectment brought by John Fasholt, the plaintiff in error and plaintiff below, against John Feed, the defendant in error and defendant below, and the following were the circumstances appearing on the trial: On the 11th of March, 1816, John Feed contracted to sell a tract of land to Valentine Fasholt, at the price of eight pounds per acre.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. Error to (he Court of Common Pleas of Northumberland county, in an ejectment brought by John Fasholt, the plaintiff in error and plaintiff below, against John Feed, the defendant in error and defendant below, and the following were the circumstances appearing on the trial: On the 11th of March, 1816, John Feed contracted to sell a tract of land to Valentine Fasholt, at the price of eight pounds per acre. Fasholi was to pay five hundred pounds on the first day of April, when the deed was made: it was to be a good and sufficient deed.- The deed was not made at the time appointed. At…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was "delivered by
Huston, J.
The law is now settled, that a judgment against a man who by articles has agreed to sell, but who has not made a deed, nor recovered the whole of the purchase money, is a lien on the vendor’s interest, and a purchaser under a sheriff, of such interest, will stand in the place of the vendor, be entitled to the money due from the purchaser, and bound to ipake a deed to the purchaser, according to the articles of agreements. Reed’s interest in this land was then bound by these judgments; and his deed, executed the 2Sth of January, 1817, but…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Ives v. CressSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1847
- Kester v. RockelSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1841
- M'Cormick v. CrallSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1837
- Miller v. Bank of OrleansSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Dodge v. PerkinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1830