Gallagher v. Boden

3 A. 17, 1 Sadler 265, 17 Week. No. 235, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 601
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJanuary 4, 1886
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 3 A. 17 (Gallagher v. Boden) 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
Gallagher v. Boden, 3 A. 17, 1 Sadler 265, 17 Week. No. 235, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 601 (Pa. 1886).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Evidence was clearly admissible to prove that the plaintiff bought with full knowledge that the street had been located, and necessarily understood its effect on the lot he was purchasing.

The deed tendered was for the 60 feet front as specified. The contract was for “about 200” in depth. It is only 195 feet. Hnder all the facts of the case, that is not such a deficiency as to relieve the purchaser from his contract. Lie knew quite as much in regard to the size and location of the lot as the vendor did, and that the damages would accrue to him when the street should be opened.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Green v. Sun Life Assurance Co.
149 F. Supp. 3d 1000 (N.D. Illinois, 2016)
Lee v. United States
196 F. Supp. 2d 1351 (Court of International Trade, 2002)
In Re KNIGHTSBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT CO. INC.
884 F.2d 145 (Fourth Circuit, 1989)
ICON Group, Inc. v. Mahogany Run Development Corp.
829 F.2d 473 (Third Circuit, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 A. 17, 1 Sadler 265, 17 Week. No. 235, 1886 Pa. LEXIS 601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gallagher-v-boden-pa-1886.