Hancock v. Melloy
Citations
- 187 Pa. 371
- 41 A. 313
- 1898 Pa. LEXIS 820
Syllabus
<p>Equity — Practice—Findings of fact — Review —Appeals.</p> <p>Where there is evidence to sustain the findings of fact by the court below in an equity suit, the Supreme Court will not nicely weigh the testimony to determine which side predominates, nor carefully compare the statements of contradictory witnesses and pass on their credibility. Under the new equity rules, this is for the court below.</p> <p>Statute of frauds — Part performance of oral contract — Specific performanee.</p> <p>A part performance of an oral contract for the conveyance of an interest in real estate takes it out of the operation of the statute of frauds and enables a court of equity to decree a full and specific performance of such contract.</p> <p>On a bill in equity filed by a sister against a brother, it appeared that the mother of the parties had been the administratrix of her husband’s estate, but that the defendant had transacted all the business of the estate. When the administratrix’s account was filed, the plaintiff sought to surcharge the accountant with considerable sums of money, and also claimed an equitable interest in certain real estate. To facilitate a compromise the case was continued by the orphans’ court, and on the following day plaintiff and defendant, with their counsel, met and concluded an oral agreement which was to be carried into effect by a formal writing to be thereafter drawn by counsel, a memorandum of,which was at the time made. By this agreement plaintiff consented to the confirmation of the account as filed, and defendant was to pay to the plaintiff a portion of the proceeds of the sale of the real estate. On llie following day the account was confirmed at the request of the parties. After the confirmation of the account defendant refused to execute the written agreement, offering, however, to consent to the opening of the account, but 'to this some of the other parties interested therein objected. Held, (1) that the evidence showed a part performance of t
Judges: Dean, Fell, Green, McCollum, Mitchell, Sterrett
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Steinmeyer v. SiebertSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1899-03-27· cited 42×
- Ridley Park Shopping Center, Inc. v. Sun Ray Drug Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1962-04-17· cited 36×
- Sklaroff v. SklaroffSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1919-02-03· cited 15×
- Briggs v. SackettSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1980-02-08· cited 11×
- Mackintyre v. JonesSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1899-03-23· cited 11×
- Rorabaugh's EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1911-01-03· cited 6×
- Glasgow v. G. R. C. Coal Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1981-10-09· cited 5×
- Canavan v. PayeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1907-10-07· cited 5×
- Miller v. PiattSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1907-05-13· cited 3×
- Wakeling v. CockerSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1903-05-20· cited 2×
- Obney v. ObneySuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1904-07-28· cited 2×
- Wentzel's Assigned EstateSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1906-03-12· cited 1×
- Park Lumber & Crate Co. v. Philadelphia Waste Paper Corp.Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas· 1952-06-20
- Gogel v. BlazofskyLehigh County Court of Common Pleas· 1956-12-31
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.