Hathaway & Armstrong ex rel. Cochran v. Hoge

1 A. 392, 1 Sadler 119, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 637
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedOctober 19, 1885
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 1 A. 392 (Hathaway & Armstrong ex rel. Cochran v. Hoge) 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
Hathaway & Armstrong ex rel. Cochran v. Hoge, 1 A. 392, 1 Sadler 119, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 637 (Pa. 1885).

Opinion

Pee Cueiam :

The vendor of the land was ready and willing at all times to convey a good title according to the terms of his contract. After the vendee had made several payments according to his agreement he put it out of his power to fulfil the residue of his contract

. His payments were voluntary. He then cannot rescind the contract and recover the sum which he had thus paid to the vendor. It matters not that the vendor- might not have been compelled to perform his agreement; it is sufficient that he was ready and willing to do so.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Messinger v. Lee
60 A.2d 599 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1948)
Long v. Holben
35 Pa. D. & C. 323 (Lehigh County Court of Common Pleas, 1939)
Roberts v. Roesch
159 A. 870 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1932)
Malmberg v. Baugh
218 P. 975 (Utah Supreme Court, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 A. 392, 1 Sadler 119, 1885 Pa. LEXIS 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hathaway-armstrong-ex-rel-cochran-v-hoge-pa-1885.