44 N.Y. 609, Baldwin v. Humphrey

Citation:44 N.Y. 609
Party Name:ELISHA S. BALDWIN, Respondent, v. WILLIAM HUMPHREY, PETER N. BERRY and SUSAN his wife, JAMES C. EMANS and ADELIA his wife, WILLIAM E. HAXTON and SARAH his wife, Appellants.
Case Date:September 13, 1871
Court:New York Court of Appeals

Page 609

44 N.Y. 609

ELISHA S. BALDWIN, Respondent,

v.

WILLIAM HUMPHREY, PETER N. BERRY and SUSAN his wife, JAMES C. EMANS and ADELIA his wife, WILLIAM E. HAXTON and SARAH his wife, Appellants.

New York Court of Appeal

September 13, 1871

Argued May 5, 1871.

Page 610

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 611

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 612

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 613

COUNSEL

John H. Reynolds, for the appellants, to the points discussed in the opinion, cited Voorhees v. Presbyterian Church of Amsterdam (8 Barb., 135); S. C., 17, Id 103; Sweet v. Jacock (6 Paige, 335); Lees v. Nutall (2 Myl. & K., 819); Van Epps v. Van Epps (9 Paige, 241); Torry v. Bank of Orleans (Id., 649); Brewster v. Power (10 Paige, 567); 4 Kent's Com., 305-6.

Homer A. Nelson, for the respondent, cited People v. Bostwick (5 Tiffany, 447); Larkin v. Mann (2 Paige, 27); 3 Paige, 245; Cox v. Smith (4 John. Ch., 271); Phelps v. Green (3 Id., 302); Jenkins v. Van Schaack (3 Paige, 245); Code § § 140, 142, 143.

EARL, C.

By the deeds of May 27th and July 7th, 1864, the legal title to the land in question became vested in the parties to this action.

They purchased the land as a committee, representing and acting for all the parties who subscribed the paper introduced in evidence, and marked "E." It cannot be doubted that the parties to the paper agreed that the land should be purchased and the improvements made thereon, at their joint expense, and that each should have an equal share in the land and sheds to be erected thereon. All the terms of this agreement

Page 614

distinctly appear in the paper, in express terms, or are to be implied from what does appear. It must be assumed that the parties to the paper were interested in the Hopewell Church, and the agreement contemplated the purchase of the lot and of the sheds, and the grading of the lot and the erection thereon of the sheds, for their mutual benefit.

The intention and object of the parties would be entirely defeated, if the grantees in the deed could take the property and keep it. It would be a fraud upon the other parties to the paper.

It is claimed by the plaintiff that the grantees in the deed were not bound to make the improvements, and, upon their completion, to convey to each of the other parties their share, for the reason that the paper does not contain any such agreement on their part. It is true that it does not contain such an express agreement, and if they had not signed it, it is doubtless true that it would have been optional with them to perform, or not, on their part. But they have signed the paper, and hence are bound to perform all that which, it may be fairly implied from the terms or language used, they agreed to perform. It is a rule of construction, that whatever...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP
30 practice notes
  • 85 N.Y. 53, Morse v. Morse
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • April 19, 1881
    ...(Van Schuyver v. Mulford, 59 N.Y. 426; Prentice v. Janssen, 79 Id. 478; Selden v. Vermilya, 2 Sandf. 568; Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 609; Sullivan v. Sullivan, 66 Id. 37; Hetzel v. Barber, 69 Id. 1; 1 R. S. 737, § 121; 2 R. S. [ 6th ed.], Banks', 1117, § 142.) There is a valid and legal g......
  • 229 N.Y. 210, Ehrenworth v. George F. Stuhmer & Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • June 8, 1920
    ...not the promise implied in law from the language, acts and conduct of both parties? (Barton v. McLean, 5 Hill, 256; Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 609; Richards v. Edick, 17 Barb. 263; Jugla v. Trouttit, 120 N.Y. 21; Wood v. Duff-Gordon, 222 N.Y. 88; City of New York v. Delli Paoli, 202 N.Y. ......
  • 231 N.Y. 459, Oscar Schlegel Mfg. Co. v. Peter Cooper's Glue Factory
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • July 14, 1921
    ...Samuel J. Reid for respondent. The contract was valid and binding on both parties. (Barton v. MacLean, 5 Hill, 256; Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 609; Butler v. Thompson, 92 U.S. 412; Booth v. Cleveland Mill Co., 74 N.Y. 15; Ehrenworth v. Stuhmer & Co., 229 N.Y. 210; N.Y. C. Iron Works v......
  • 103 A.D. 327, Robb v. Washington & Jefferson College
    • United States
    • New York New York Supreme Court Appelate Division First Department
    • Invalid date
    ...whatever may be fairly implied from the terms or language of an instrument is in judgment of law contained in it.' (Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 614; Rogers v. Kneeland, 10 Wend. 218.) In Lewin on Trusts (Vol. 1 [Text Book Series], p. 153, note 1) the editor in a foot note well states the r......
  • Free signup to view additional results
30 cases
  • 85 N.Y. 53, Morse v. Morse
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • April 19, 1881
    ...(Van Schuyver v. Mulford, 59 N.Y. 426; Prentice v. Janssen, 79 Id. 478; Selden v. Vermilya, 2 Sandf. 568; Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 609; Sullivan v. Sullivan, 66 Id. 37; Hetzel v. Barber, 69 Id. 1; 1 R. S. 737, § 121; 2 R. S. [ 6th ed.], Banks', 1117, § 142.) There is a valid and legal g......
  • 229 N.Y. 210, Ehrenworth v. George F. Stuhmer & Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • June 8, 1920
    ...not the promise implied in law from the language, acts and conduct of both parties? (Barton v. McLean, 5 Hill, 256; Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 609; Richards v. Edick, 17 Barb. 263; Jugla v. Trouttit, 120 N.Y. 21; Wood v. Duff-Gordon, 222 N.Y. 88; City of New York v. Delli Paoli, 202 N.Y. ......
  • 231 N.Y. 459, Oscar Schlegel Mfg. Co. v. Peter Cooper's Glue Factory
    • United States
    • New York New York Court of Appeals
    • July 14, 1921
    ...Samuel J. Reid for respondent. The contract was valid and binding on both parties. (Barton v. MacLean, 5 Hill, 256; Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 609; Butler v. Thompson, 92 U.S. 412; Booth v. Cleveland Mill Co., 74 N.Y. 15; Ehrenworth v. Stuhmer & Co., 229 N.Y. 210; N.Y. C. Iron Works v......
  • 103 A.D. 327, Robb v. Washington & Jefferson College
    • United States
    • New York New York Supreme Court Appelate Division First Department
    • Invalid date
    ...whatever may be fairly implied from the terms or language of an instrument is in judgment of law contained in it.' (Baldwin v. Humphrey, 44 N.Y. 614; Rogers v. Kneeland, 10 Wend. 218.) In Lewin on Trusts (Vol. 1 [Text Book Series], p. 153, note 1) the editor in a foot note well states the r......
  • Free signup to view additional results