Norris v. Crowe

Citations

• 206 Pa. 438
• 55 A. 1125
• 1903 Pa. LEXIS 739

Syllabus

<p>Equity — Mistake—Ignorance of the law.</p> <p>In no case is ignorance or mistake of the law with the full knowledge of the facts, per se a ground for equitable relief. If the evidence shows, that in addition there would be great hardship in enforcing the contract made in ignorance of the law, equity may afford relief. But between the border of great hardship and actual fraud there are many contracts made in ignorance of the law, yet which result in no inequitable consequences from the enforcement of the general rule. In such cases the rule should be enforced.</p> <p>Ground rents — Agreement as to reduction of rent — Mistake in law— Equity — Remedy at law.</p> <p>Where an owner of a ground rent agreed in writing under a threat of payment of principal to reduce the rent from six per cent to five per cent, and both the owner of the ground rent and the terre-tenant were ignorant at the time of the agreement, of the decision in Palairet v. Snyder, 106 Pa. 227, in which it was held that a ground rent of the kind in question was an irredeemable one, the mistake in law is no ground for the interference of a court of equity to cancel the agreement in the interest of the owner ■of the ground rent. In such a case there is no element of such extreme hardship as will call for a departure from the general rule.</p> <p>In the above case after the ground landlord discovered his mistake he brought an action at law to recover the full six per cent, and while this action was pending filed a bill in equity to cancel the agreement. Held, that the bill should be dismissed, because (1) plaintiff had a full, adequate and convenient remedy at law, and (2) equity had no jurisdiction to correct the mistake of law alleged.</p>