Barrett v. Forney

Citations

• 82 Va. 269
• 1886 Va. LEXIS 29

Syllabus

<p>1. —Specific Performance—Parol contract.—Though specific performance of parol contract for sale of land is not decreed ex débito juditice, but in exercise of sound judicial discretion under the circumstances of the case; yet it will always be decreed when the contract is certain and definite in terms and clearly proved, when the • part performance was pursuant to the contract, and the contract has been so far performed that a refusal of full performance would operate a fraud upon the party and place him in a situation not admitting of compensation in damages.' In such a case, equity will not allow a statute made to prevent fraud to work a fraud. Wright v. Pucket, 22 Gratt. 370.</p> <p>2. Idem—Case at bar.—B. & Co. and F. jointly purchased and received conveyance of land for $6,000; whereof F. paid $1,400, and B. & Co. $100, cash payment. Then F., by parol contract, bought of B. & Co. his interest for $1,500, paid in hand, and F.’s assumption to pay balance of purchase money, which F. paid, and was left in actual and exclusive possession for twelve years, during which time he made permanent improvements at cost of $6,000; and then sued for specific performance.</p> <p>Held :</p> <p>F. should be decreed specific performance of this parol contract against B. & Co.</p>