Northrop v. Boone

Citations

• 66 Ill. 368

Syllabus

<p>1. Specific pebfobmaítce—sufficiency of bill to stipport decree. It was objected, on appeal, to a bill for specific performance, that it did not aver that the defendant owned the land or could convey it; also, that the bill did not describe the land as situate in any county. The bill alleged that defendant was in possession of the land, and the proof showed ownership. The venue of the bill was laid in the proper county, and alleged that the land was situate “in said county:” Held,, that the objections were not well taken.</p> <p>2. Same—deseription of land in bill. Where a bill for specific performance only sought for specific performance as to a tract described by metes and bounds, and for that the decree was rendered; and it appeared it was surveyed in 'the presence of both parties, and was clearly the tract intended to be sold under a verbal contract, it was held there was no error.</p> <p>3. Statute of FBAUDS-T-zo/te will take a verbal contract to convey land, out of the statute. Where, under a parol contract, land was partly purchased, and §10 paid down, and partly given in consideration of the erection of a blacksmith shop, the land not being worth over §25, and, as the result of the negotiation, possession was taken by the complainant, and improvements made by him on the land to the value of §300 to §500: Held, that these facts were sufficient to take the case out of the operation of the statute of frauds, on bill in equity seeking a specific performance.</p>