Beattie v. Burt

122 A.D. 473, 107 N.Y.S. 153, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2478
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 29, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 122 A.D. 473 (Beattie v. Burt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Beattie v. Burt, 122 A.D. 473, 107 N.Y.S. 153, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2478 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Opinions

Gaynor, J. :

This is a suit by the purchaser for specific performance of a contract to sell real estate. The complaint alleges that the defendants are man and wife, and that they are the owners in fee oí the land in question, but whether by the entireties or as tenants in common [474]*474is not alleged. The answer dqes not deny this allegation. The complaint alleges that the defendants' made a written contract of sale of the land to the plaintiff, and that they refuse to perform. The allegation of the contract is denied by the answer., The contract when put in evidence .proved,to be by one Do'nnockef to sell the land to the plaintiff. It does not mention the defendants or purport to bind them. The plaintiff introduced. oral evidence, however, tending’to show, that the husband authorized Donnocker to sell the laud as broker. There was no evidence that the wife gave him any authority. At the' close of the plaintiff’s evidence the court.therefore dismissed, the complaint as to the wife on her motion. It then'dismissed the complaint as to the husband on his motion. This vras not error. ' The complaint was. for the specific performance of á contract by tlie husband and the wife to convey the land, aiid.there was a failure off-proof of such a contract. The-contract proved was that of the husband alone to convey the land. It was impossible for him to., convey it; he could only convey his' undivided share; and the rule in a case of inability to pérform is that specific performance will .not be decreed (Pomeroy on Specific Performance, sec. 293)

As no point is-made of -the failure Of the learned trial judge to make findings of fact that question of practice need not be considered. ' '

The judgment should he affirmed.'

Jenks, Rich and Miller, JJ., concurred; Hooker, J., read foi; reversal. ■ .

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Reilly v. Cullinane
287 F. 994 (D.C. Circuit, 1923)
Davis v. Epoch Producing Corp.
91 Misc. 631 (New York Supreme Court, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
122 A.D. 473, 107 N.Y.S. 153, 1907 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2478, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beattie-v-burt-nyappdiv-1907.