Skip to main content
· 10/14/1912

Schmidt v. Lieberum

Citations

  • 51 Pa. Super. 591
  • 1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 264

Syllabus

<p>Ejectment — Parties^-Plaintiffs holding by distinct title — Rule to bring ejectment — Pleadings—Estoppel.</p> <p>1. In an action of ejectment the defendants will not be heard to object that the plaintiffs could not jointly maintain the action for a tract of land to the component parts of which they held title by separate and distinct deeds, where it appears that the plaintiffs were ruled to bring the action, that the proceedings for the rule, were- instituted by' the defendants jointly against the plaintiffs jointly, thatthedand in these proceedings was described as one tract and not as separate parcels, and that neither in these proceedings, nor in the pleadings, nor in any way until after the jury was sworn, was objection made to the joinder of the plaintiffs and of the separate parcels of land, in one action.</p> <p>Statute of frauds — Consideration—Possession—Part performance— Improvements.</p> <p>2. 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 the land. It must fix the amount of consideration. It.must establish the fact that possession was taken in pursuance of the contract, and at or immedi.ately 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; and 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.</p> <p>Practice, C. P. — Trial—After discovered evidence.</p> <p>3. A new trial will not be granted on the ground of after discovered evidence where the evidence is not strictly after discovered as that term is understood' in the law relating to new trials and where the evidence, although somewhat more definite than that produced at the trial, is still in

Judges: Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice

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.