Sample v. Horlacher

Citations

• 177 Pa. 247
• 35 A. 615
• 1896 Pa. LEXIS 971

Syllabus

<p>Statute offrauds — Parol contract for sale of lands — Evidence.</p> <p>In order to take a parol contract for the sale of lands out of the operation of the statute of frauds its terms must be shown by full, complete, satisfactory and indubitable proof; the evidence must define the boundaries and indicate the quantity of land; it must fix the amount of the consideration ; it must establish the fact that possession was taken in pursuance of the contract, and at or immediately after the time it was made, the fact that the change of possession was notorious, and the fact that it has been exclusive, continuous and maintained; it must show performance or part performance by the vendee which could not be compensated in damages, and such as would make rescission inequitable and unjust: Hart v. Carroll, 85 Pa. 510..</p> <p>Ejectment — Statute offrauds — Parol contract for sale of lands — Evidence —Trial judge sitting as chancellor.</p> <p>In an action of ejectment to enforce a parol contract for the sale of land it is in the first place the duty of the trial judge, who exercises the functions of a chancellor, to determine whether the evidence adduced is sufficient to support an equity in the party claiming specific execution of the verbal contract, and then for the jury to say whether the testimony is true or not. If the evidence fails to make out a case that can be fairly classed as an exception to the operation of the statute of frauds, it is the duty of the judge either to reject it, or to instruct the jury in favor of the defendant.</p> <p>In a proceeding to enforce a parol contract for the sale of land, it appeared that no boundaries were designated, and no time for payment was fixed. The vendee made improvements upon the land but they were paid for by the vendors allowing him credit on a note which he owed to them. Held, that the case was not an exception to the statute of frauds.</p>