Lofland v. Maull

Citations

• 1 Del. Ch. 359

Syllabus

<p>A purchaser of land, under a contract for a conveyance, claimed to set off against his bond for purchase money certain payments which he had made in satisfaction of debts due from the vendor to third persons. The contract did not, in terms, authorize the purchaser to make the payments for which credit was claimed, nor was there proof of any order or authority from the complainant specifically applying to the payments made. Held, that in this case there was proof, to the satisfaction of the Chancellor, of a general authority to the purchaser to apply purchase money to debts of the vendor. But held further, that such authority was not requisite to entitle the purchaser to the benefit of the payments,—that the complainant, upon the general principle that he who seeks equity must do equity, was bound in this' court to allow just payments made for his benefit. Held also, that upon exceptions to a sworn account of the purchase money, filed by the purchaser in answer to the prayer of the bill, he was not under the onus of proving the existence of the debts paid by him and sought to be set off.</p> <p>In this case the purchase money was payame by instalments in futuro. There was no stipulation in the contract of sale with respect to the time of delivering possession of the land ; but after the sale and before the instalments had all become due, the purchaser, with the vendor’s • consent, entered into possession. Held, that he did not thereby become chargeable with interest on the unpaid purchase money from the date of such possession, in the absence of any stipulation to that effect in the contract of sale.</p>