Skip to main content
· 4/15/1866

Hough v. Coughlan

Citations

  • 41 Ill. 130

Syllabus

<p>1. Specific pebfobmance — discretion of the court. It is an established doctrine in chancery, that an application for a decree of specific performance is addressed to the sound legal discretion of the court, and a decree does not follow as matter of course, because a legal contract is shown to exist.</p> <p>2. So, where a long period of time has elapsed, courts will be cautious in enforcing a specific performance:</p> <p>3. Right to specific performance defeated—lapse of time, contract disclaimed, adverse possession, improvements. And, where a bond was made in 1849, assigned to the complainant twelve years afterward, during which time the assignor repeatedly disclaimed all interest in the land, and during the last eight years of which the grantees of the person who made the bond were in actual possession, cultivating it and making valuable improvements on it, all with the knowledge of both assignor and assignee, a specific performance was refused.</p> <p>4. Under such circumstances, all parties interested were bound to take notice of a possession so notorious and visible, and they must be charged with all legal and equitable claims of the occupants.</p> <p>5. Delay—its effect. It is the settled doctrine that great delay of either party, unexplained, in not performing a contract, or in not prosecuting his rights under it, constitute such laches as to amount, for the purpose of specific performance, to an abandonment of the contract, and equity will afford no aid.</p> <p>6. So, where an action for title under a bond was delayed for more than twelve years after the alleged purchase, and the delay was not accounted for, and during all that time the land was in the notorious occupancy of parties claiming title, by deed, of record, and who had made valuable improvements, and no claim under the bond had been asserted, a bill for specific performance was properly dismissed.</p> <p>7. Possession and improvement — title aided ty. Where, under a title of record, a party con

Judges: Breese

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.