Graham v. Moore

Superior Court of Delaware

Graham v. Moore

5 Del. 318

Superior Court of Delaware·Decided July 1, 1851·Published

Opinion

The property sold in this case was the right of Tincey Moore, as tenant in dower, in the lands of her late husband; and the dower had not been laid off.

Cullen, for the rule. Saulsbury and McFee, contra.

Graham was the purchaser; and now objected to the sale, because he could get no .title ; the dower (not assigned) being no estate liable to be levied on or sold. (13 Wend. Rep., 524; 10 Ib., 414, 528; 2 Cowen's Rep., 638; 1 Cruise Dig., 131, 194-5; 14 Mass. Rep., 378.)

Mr. Saulsbury said, caveat emptor; but the court set aside the sale.

Rule absolute.

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

The property sold in this case was the right of Tincey Moore, as tenant in dower, in the lands of her late husband; and the dower had not been laid off.

Cullen, for the rule. Saulsbury and McFee, contra.

Graham was the purchaser; and now objected to the sale, because he could get no .title ; the dower (not assigned) being no estate liable to be levied on or sold. (13 Wend. Rep., 524; 10 Ib., 414, 528; 2 Cowen's Rep., 638; 1 Cruise Dig., 131, 194-5; 14 Mass. Rep., 378.)

Mr. Saulsbury said, caveat emptor; but the court set aside the sale.

Rule absolute.

Graham v. Moore, 5 Del. 318 (Del. Ct. App. 1851).

Pincite

5 Del. 318 (Graham v. Moore) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related