Northrop v. Speary

1 Day 23
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided July 1, 1802·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

The contract, stated in the declaration, was but one, entire contract, made at time of the sale and conveyance of the land, the whole of which ⅛ to be considered as included in the deed and note.

If parol testimony be admissible to establish the claim of the plaintiff below, on account of an excess of land, •sp the same principle, it must have been admitted, had [27]*27the land fallen short of the estimate made at the time of the sale and conveyance, on a claim of reduction from the sum secured by the note. The effect of such construction and practice, would he (he destruction of all written contracts.

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

Northrop v. Speary, 1 Day 23 (Colo. 1802).

1 Day 23 (Northrop v. Speary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

George v. George
141 S.W.2d 558 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1940)
Bladen v. Wells
30 Md. 577 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1869)
Carter v. Hamilton
11 Barb. 147 (New York Supreme Court, 1851)
Belden v. Seymour
8 Conn. 304 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1831)