Gray v. Howell
Citations
- 205 Pa. 211
- 54 A. 774
- 1903 Pa. LEXIS 548
Syllabus
<p>Vendor and vendee — Parol eontraet — Measure of damages — Statute of frauds.</p> <p>An action may be maintained for the breach of parol contract for the sale of land, but damages in such an action are limited to the recovery of the purchase money paid or the value of the consideration given, and the expenses incurred, and do not include the loss of the bargain.</p> <p>Attorney at law — Scope of authority — Sale of land.</p> <p>An implied authority of an attorney at law in this state is very broad as to those things which arise in the regular coui'se of litigation and pertain to the conduct of an action, but he is without authority to compromise an action or to accept land instead of money in satisfaction of a judgment. His authority cannot by implication be extended to authorize the sale of his client’s land in payment for services to be rendered.</p>
Judges: Brown, Dean, Fell, Mestrezat, Mitchell, Pele, Potter
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Weir v. RahonSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1980-08-08· cited 16×
- Miocene Ditch Co. v. MooreNinth Circuit· 1907-02-04· cited 4×
- Huntzinger v. DevlinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1922-11-20· cited 3×
- McCloskey v. TimmonsSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1920-02-28· cited 2×
- Manieri v. City of PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia County Court of Common Pleas· 1928-03-12
- Shelhammer v. Erie InsuranceAlleghany County Court of Common Pleas· 1995-08-31
- Commonwealth v. RhodesDelaware County Court of Quarter Sessions· 1937-12-15
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.