Montray Realty Co. v. Arthurs

100 A. 325, 29 Del. 361, 6 Boyce 361, 1917 Del. LEXIS 6
CourtSuperior Court of Delaware
DecidedMarch 29, 1917
DocketNo. 64
StatusPublished

This text of 100 A. 325 (Montray Realty Co. v. Arthurs) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Montray Realty Co. v. Arthurs, 100 A. 325, 29 Del. 361, 6 Boyce 361, 1917 Del. LEXIS 6 (Del. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Conrad, J.,

delivering the opinion of the court:

This is an action of assumpsit on two certain promissory notes made by John W. Arthurs, the defendant, on August 2, 1915, payable to the order of Montray Realty Company, the plaintiff; the first is for the sum of one hundred dollars, payable sixty days after date, and the other is for sixteen hundred and seventy-five dollars payable in instalments as follows: Thirty dollars on September 2, 1915, and thirty dollars on the second day of each month thereafter until fully paid, all with interest to date, at six per cent, per annum.

These notes together with a check for one hundred dollars to the plaintiff company, were delivered to a representative of the company, together with an instrument of writing entitled “Application,” bearing the same date and hereafter called such.

“Application “The Montray Realty Company “No.-. 200 Fifth Avenue, Aug. 2, 1915. “New York
“I hereby make application for two and one-half lots situated at West-bury, Town of North Hempstead, Long Island, State of New York. Said lots being as per blue print, and which are now known as, and by lots numbers lot 105, all lots 106 and lot 107 on Map No. 1 of Westbury, filed in the office of the Clerk of Nassau County, Mineóla, Long Island, State of New York.
“ The said lots guaranteed to be high and dry and will be conveyed free from all incumbrances. Title to this tract has been guaranteed by the Lawyers’ Title Insurance & Trust Company, New York.
“It is agreed that I shall pay no assessments for improvements on this tract for a period of one year from date and that thereafter assessments for improvements shall not exceed three dollars per year for each lot for a period [363]*363of four years, unless I undertake to erect any building of any kind on herein described lots. It is understood that I shall not be required to build upon said lots.
“ I agree to pay for above lots $1875.00 payable $200, $100 in note sixty days with application. Balance payable at the rate of $30.00 monthly until paid in full.
“I also agree that if I make default in the payments as above set forth, or any one of them, for a period of sixty days after the same shall be due, that then and in that event, all of the deferred payments as above set forth shall at once become due and payable at your option.
“All payments to be made to the order of the Montray Realty Company. Payments to be made by check, draft or money order only. The Montray Realty Company will confirm number of lots, as designated above and assigned to me on this purchase.
It is further agreed when payment in full has been made, according to contract, a full covenant warranty deed shall be issued free of cost, in the name of
“John W. Arthurs.
(“Write full given name.)
“ The building restrictions in said deed to be uniform with that of deeds to other purchasers in this tract, said restrictions requiring that the property shall be used for residence purposes only, excepting the lots facing on Post and Maple Avenues.
“It is understood and agreed that after acceptance by the Montray Realty Company, this contract cannot be cancelled, and that its validity shall not be affected by any verbal or other agreements not contained herein. The purchaser acknowledges receipt of duplicate of this contract.
J. W. Arthurs,
“Applicant.
“Grain Dealer, Coal, etc.,
“Occupation.
“Kenton, Delaware.
“Address.
“Received on account $200.00.
“S. E. Underhill, Representative.
“ The Montray Realty Company,
“200 Fifth Avenue, New York.”

At the close of the testimony the court was requested by defendant's counsel to give binding instructions for the defendant.

The contention in support of the motion is that the said application shows on its face that it was to be accepted by the plaintiff company and that until such acceptance and notification thereof to the defendant, there was no completed and binding contract between the parties. The evidence is that the application was signed about noon of the day of its date, and that about 7:30 o’clock in the evening of the same day the defendant sent the following telegram:

[364]*364“Kenton, Del. 8/2/15.
“The Montray Realty Co.,.200 Fifth Ave., New York., N. Y.
“Cancel application given Underhill today for two and one-half lots.
J. W. Arthurs.
“JM. &RI. 7:30 P.”

That on August fourth following, the plaintiff company sent the following letter to defendant:

“August 4, 1915.
“Mr. J. W. Arthurs, Kenton, Delaware—
Dear Sir:—
We have received yours of August 2d and we have asked our Mr. Under-hill who is here today to call and see you for the purpose of securing a more complete understanding.
‘‘We believe that the only way that you will be satisfied now with your relations with our Company is for you to carry out your contract and pay the notes which you have given.
“ If you will do this we have every reason to believe that you will be glad that you entered into this transaction.
“We think to accede to your requests now would not only be an injustice to you but to all concerned and would be very poor business policy from any standpoint.
Very truly yours,
“The Montray Realty Company,
“ERD/H. By E. R. Dumont."

And again on August 10th, sent the following letter:

“August 10th, 1915.
“Mr. John W. Arthurs, Kenton, Delaware—
Dear Sir:
We have your order for two and one-half lots in Westbury, Long Island, namely, Nos. 106 and 107 and one-half of 105, as shown on Map No. 1 of Westbury.
“We acknowledge receipt of $100 on account, and your two notes for the balance, $1775, with interest at the rate of six per cent, per annum, said notes payable as follows: $100 due Oct. 1st, 1915; $1675 payable at the rate of $30 per month beginning September 2d, 1915.
“We will execute a deed to the Westbury property and same will be held for you in trust, and we guarantee its prompt delivery to you on completion of your payments.
“We desire to thank you for the courtesy extended to our representative and we hope to have the pleasure of seeing you in the near future.
“Yours very truly,

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

Related

White v. . Corlies
46 N.Y. 467 (New York Court of Appeals, 1871)
Atlanta Buggy Co. v. Hess Spring & Axle Co.
52 S.E. 613 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
McCully's Adm'r v. Phœnix Mutual Life Ins.
18 W. Va. 782 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1881)
Weaver v. Burr
3 L.R.A. 94 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1888)
J. L. Owens Co. v. Bemis
133 N.W. 59 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1911)
Durkee v. Schultz
98 N.W. 149 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1904)
Bauman v. McManus
89 P. 15 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1907)
Challenge Wind & Feed Mill Co. v. Kerr
53 N.W. 555 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1892)
Baird v. Pratt
148 F. 825 (Eighth Circuit, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 A. 325, 29 Del. 361, 6 Boyce 361, 1917 Del. LEXIS 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montray-realty-co-v-arthurs-delsuperct-1917.