History
  • No items yet
midpage
Elliott v. Jenness
111 Mass. 29
Mass.
1872
Check Treatment
Chapman, C. J.

The declaration alleges that the defendant, in consideration of the purchase by the plaintiff from the defendant at her request of a tract of land on certain streets in Lynn for the sum stated, promised to grade, crown and shape, make fit for travel and finish to the degree stated, the said streets on which the land bounded throughout their whole width; and that the plaintiff purchased and paid for the land, took the deed, a copy of which was annexed to the declaration, and requested the defendant to do said work, which he refused to do. The defendant demurs to the declaration “ as setting up an oral contract relating to the conveyance of land, inconsistent with the terms of the deed annexed to the declaration, and being without consideration.”

But the declaration does not allege that the contract is oral. Even when a contract is required by the statute of frauds to be in writing, a declaration upon it need not allege that it is in writing. Price v. Weaver, 18 Gray, 272. If it is alleged to be oral, a demurrer will lie, otherwise the statute must be pleaded.

The contract is alleged to be made in consideration that the plaintiff would purchase the land. Such a consideration is valid. Pierce v. Woodward, 6 Pick. 206. Brackett v. Evans, 1 Cush. 79. The demurrer must therefore be overruled, and the judgment for ' the plaintiff Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Elliott v. Jenness
Court Name: Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Date Published: Nov 15, 1872
Citation: 111 Mass. 29
Court Abbreviation: Mass.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.