Delp's Appeal

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Delp's Appeal

109 Pa. 277, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 519

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 23, 1885

DocketNo. 102

StatusPublished

This text of 109 Pa. 277 (Delp's Appeal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Delp's Appeal, 109 Pa. 277, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 519 (Pa. 1885).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was filed

Per Curiam.

Whatever might be the result in a common law action, we are clearly of the opinion that the parol evidence is insufficient to change the written agreement. The evidence so far as it goes, tends to prove a new and independent parol contract, rather than any change of an existing written contract. It is true the appellant is willing [285]*285to accept a conveyance of a less number of acres than be claimed in tlie bill filed. If that was the only difficulty in the case perhaps a decree for the lesser number might be sustained. There are several other objections. Among them is the fact that the tender was not made on the basis now claimed. This claim is not only in direct conflict with his oath in the bill filed, but also with his testimony before the Master. Conceding be was honestly mistaken, yet it presents a case which is insufficient to move a chancellor to decree specific performance of the alleged contract.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.

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

The opinion of the court was filed

Per Curiam.

Whatever might be the result in a common law action, we are clearly of the opinion that the parol evidence is insufficient to change the written agreement. The evidence so far as it goes, tends to prove a new and independent parol contract, rather than any change of an existing written contract. It is true the appellant is willing [285]*285to accept a conveyance of a less number of acres than be claimed in tlie bill filed. If that was the only difficulty in the case perhaps a decree for the lesser number might be sustained. There are several other objections. Among them is the fact that the tender was not made on the basis now claimed. This claim is not only in direct conflict with his oath in the bill filed, but also with his testimony before the Master. Conceding be was honestly mistaken, yet it presents a case which is insufficient to move a chancellor to decree specific performance of the alleged contract.

Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed at the costs of the appellant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 Pa. 277, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delps-appeal-pa-1885.