Rogers v. Salmon

Saratoga Chancery Court

Rogers v. Salmon

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 4, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 247

DecidedJanuary 25, 1841

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 4 (Rogers v. Salmon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Saratoga Chancery Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rogers v. Salmon, 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 4, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 247 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1841).

Pincite

Opinion

•In this ease the chancellor decided that where the vendor of land, at the time of the sale, promises and assures the vendee that a village is to be built upoD the site of which the lots sold form a part; that the tract of land constituting such site shall be laid out into lots; that the streets shall be opened and filled up or graded without delay; that buildings shall be erected and a dock constructed, etc.,—which promises and assurances induced the vendee to purchase the lots at a large price; and the vendor afterwards fails to perform such promises, whereby the lots sold are rendered of but little value to the purchaser,—these circumstances will constitute a good defense to a suit brought to foreclose a mortgage given for the purchase money. See Donelson v. Weakley, 3 Yerg. 178. Order of the vice-chancellor reversed, and demurrer overruled, with costs.

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

•In this ease the chancellor decided that where the vendor of land, at the time of the sale, promises and assures the vendee that a village is to be built upoD the site of which the lots sold form a part; that the tract of land constituting such site shall be laid out into lots; that the streets shall be opened and filled up or graded without delay; that buildings shall be erected and a dock constructed, etc.,—which promises and assurances induced the vendee to purchase the lots at a large price; and the vendor afterwards fails to perform such promises, whereby the lots sold are rendered of but little value to the purchaser,—these circumstances will constitute a good defense to a suit brought to foreclose a mortgage given for the purchase money. See Donelson v. Weakley, 3 Yerg. 178. Order of the vice-chancellor reversed, and demurrer overruled, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 4, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-salmon-nychanctsara-1841.