Wotring v. Shoemaker

102 Pa. 496, 1883 Pa. LEXIS 84
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided March 19, 1883·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered March 19th 1883.

Per Curiam.

— This note was given as part payment of the purchase money of land. The vendee having failed to comply with the conditions of his purchase, the vendors elected to rescind the contract of sale. They applied to the Orphans’ Court and obtained an alias order of sale, and sold the land to another purchaser. This suit is not to recover from the person to whom the property was first struck down, the difference between his bid, and the sum for which it was afterwards sold. It is against one who signed the note as security for the payment of so much of the purchase money. When that sale was rescinded, all liability for purchase money as such fell, and thenceforth the note was without consideration to support it.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Wotring v. Shoemaker, 102 Pa. 496, 1883 Pa. LEXIS 84 (Pa. 1883).

102 Pa. 496 (Wotring v. Shoemaker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Berry v. Thring
74 Pa. D. & C. 165 (Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas, 1950)
Bramwell Inv. Co. v. Uggla Et Ux.
16 P.2d 913 (Utah Supreme Court, 1932)
Yakoobian v. Johnson
282 P. 522 (California Court of Appeal, 1929)