Atkinson v. Jackson
| Decision Date | 24 November 1856 |
| Parties | Atkinson v. Jackson |
| Court | Indiana Supreme Court |
From Henry Circuit Court.
The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded.
W Grose, for appellant.
J. T Elliott and J. H. Mellett, for appellee.
Atkinson filed his complaint, in the form of a petition to enforce the specific performance of a parol agreement for the conveyance of forty acres of land. Demurrer to the petition sustained. Atkinson excepted, and now presents his appeal.
The petition alleges that James Atkinson, father of the petitioner, died intestate, in June, 1853, seized in fee of certain lands therein described, and leaving the petitioner and defendants his heirs; that in 1836, when the petitioner was between fourteen and fifteen years old, his father made a verbal contract with the plaintiff, that, if he should remain with and work for his father till he attained the age of twenty-one years, he, the father, would, in consideration thereof, convey to the son a certain tract of land described, containing forty acres. It is further averred that the plaintiff served his father thenceforth until he was of age, and one year thereafter; that at the end of the service his father renewed the promise in relation to the forty acres, and had the land transferred to the plaintiff on the tax-list; that the plaintiff, in pursuance of the contract, and under the direction of his father, entered into possession, and has since made improvements thereon to the value of 400 dollars; that the value of the land at the time of the contract was about 100 dollars; that it is now worth 1,000 dollars; that his father died suddenly in June 1853, without executing a conveyance. The plaintiff, therefore, prays a decree for a deed, and for other relief.
The defendants, Jackson and others, demurred. The only statutory cause of demurrer is that the petition does not state facts sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to the relief sought. In support of the demurrer, Adamson v. Lamb, 3 Blackf. 446, is relied upon. Up to the period of full age of Adamson and Atkinson respectively, the two cases are very similar. But the year's service of Atkinson after he came of age, and the renewed promise and acts of the father, are strong distinguishing elements. That year's service constitutes a valuable consideration. The promise of the father after the maturity of the son, and at the end of the service, is thus well supported. In addition, there are the acts of the father transferring the land on the taxlist, and putting the son in possession. Still further, are the improvements on the faith of the contract. The entry, in pursuance of the agreement, and the improvements, coupled with the acts of the father, ought, it would seem, to take the case out of the Statute of Frauds. Such seems to be the tenor of the authorities. When, as in the case at bar, the party has been put in...
To continue reading
Request your trial