Lessee of Syler v. Eckhart

1 Binn. 378, 1808 Pa. LEXIS 52
CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania
DecidedJuly 11, 1808
StatusPublished
Cited by20 cases

This text of 1 Binn. 378 (Lessee of Syler v. Eckhart) 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
Lessee of Syler v. Eckhart, 1 Binn. 378, 1808 Pa. LEXIS 52 (Pa. 1808).

Opinion

The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Tilghman C. J.

This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Dauphin county, on a motion for a new trial, overruled by Judge Yeates who tried the cause, without ai-gument and by consent.

The defendants relied on a parol gift of lands by their deceased father, in consequence of which they had made valuable impi-ovements, and had long possession in their father’s life time.

Although the court are not disposed to extend the principles on which parol agreements concerning lands have been confinned, farther than they have been already carried, yet they are bound by what has been decided. It has been settled that where a parol agreement is clearly proved, in consequence of which one of the pax-ties has taken possession and made valuable impx'ovements, such agreement shall be carried into effect. We see no material difference between a sale and a gift; because it certainly would be fraudulent conduct in a parent to make a gift which he kn'ew to be void, and thus entice his child into a great expenditure of money and labour, of which he meant to reap the [381]*381benefit himself. Whether such gift was made in the present instance was submitted by the court to the jury.The jury thought there was not a gift; but the Judge who tried the cause was dis~ satisfied with the verdict, and thought that the evidence in favour of the gift greatly preponderated. He was better able to judge of this matter than we, who only take the evidence from his notes; and therefore his opinion is entitled to great weight. But independent of that, enough has appeared to satisfy us that there is reasonable ground for a new trial. The Court forbear to enter into remarks upon the evidence, as the cause i~ to be tried again.

New trial awarded.

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

Related

Eisenberger v. Eisenberger
38 Pa. Super. 569 (Superior Court of Pennsylvania, 1909)
Karren v. Rainey
83 P. 333 (Utah Supreme Court, 1905)
Lynch v. Coviglio
53 P. 983 (Utah Supreme Court, 1898)
Erie & W. V. R. Co. v. Knowles
11 A. 250 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1887)
Story v. Black
5 Mont. 26 (Montana Supreme Court, 1883)
Davis v. Bowmar
55 Miss. 671 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1878)
Sower's v. Weaver
84 Pa. 262 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1877)
Murphy v. Stell
43 Tex. 123 (Texas Supreme Court, 1875)
Peters v. Jones
35 Iowa 512 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1872)
Wood v. Thornly
58 Ill. 464 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1871)
Postlethwait v. Frease
31 Pa. 472 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1858)
Moore v. Pierson
6 Iowa 279 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1858)
Moore v. Small
19 Pa. 461 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1852)
Rhodes v. Frick
6 Watts 315 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1837)
Martin v. M'Cord
5 Watts 493 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1836)
Eckert v. Eckert
3 Pen. & W. 332 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1832)
Higgs v. Stimmel
3 Pen. & W. 115 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1831)
Lyles v. Lyles
5 S.C. Eq. 288 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 1824)
Galbraith v. Green
13 Serg. & Rawle 85 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1824)
Jones v. Peterman
3 Serg. & Rawle 543 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1817)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Binn. 378, 1808 Pa. LEXIS 52, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lessee-of-syler-v-eckhart-pa-1808.