Tate's Administrator v. Jones'

Citations

• 16 Fla. 216

Syllabus

<p>la'-pursuance of a parol agreement for the sale and conveyance of lands, the purchaser paid the price agreed on in full; the purchaser was a tenant at will, in possession at the time of making the agreement, and afterwards remained in possession, erected a dwelling house and fences, enlarged the enclosures, cultivated the land, set out fruit trees and pruned the trees already grown, and treated the property as his own, enjoying it as the home of his family, receiving the crops and the proceeds of the fruit for years, with the knowledge and without objection by the seller or his heirs or representatives: Held, upon bill filed for a specific execution of the agreement,</p> <p>1. That upon a parol agreement for the sale of lands, the payment of the purchase price alone is not sufficient to take the case out of the statute of frauds.</p> <p>2. That the payment of the purchase money, followed by delivery of possession, under a parol agreement for a sale of lands, or followed by a continued possession by the purchaser, (if already in possession,) and circumstances showing that the subsequent possession was inconsistent with tire original tenancy, and was consistent only with, and legitimately reierable to the agreement for a purchase and sale, constitute such part performance that the seller is estopped from insist- - ing that the agreement was not signed, and a specific execution of the agreement may be decreed.</p> <p>. 3. There is no rule that the improvements made by a purchaser under a parol agreement for the purchase of lands shall be of any specified value, in order to warrant the inference that they were made with reference to the contract. It is enough that they are of such a character, and made under such circumstances, that it will be inferred that they were made because ot the agreement to convey.</p>