Parker's Heirs v. Bodley
| Decision Date | 09 June 1815 |
| Citation | 7 Ky. 102 |
| Parties | Parker's heirs v. Bodley. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Upon the statute of frauds and per uries.
An agreement between B and P that the latter should make a purchase of land if possible of Byers for the joint benefit of both; that P made the purchase, and thereupon it was agreed that B should advance one half the purchase money, and be equally interested in the purchase, is within the statute of frauds and perjuries.
A writing between P, B, and others, stating P and B to be assignees of Byers, without stating of what, or the terms, or the extent of their interest, does not take the case out of the statute.
THIS suit was brought by Bodley in the Court below to recover from Parker's heirs one moiety of the lands and other estate purchased by Parker in his lifetime from one of the legatees of Joseph Byers, deceased. The bill charges that in the fall of the year 1796, Parker being about to go to the State of Pennsylvania, it was agreed between him and Bodley, that he should, if possible, make certain contracts or speculations (of which Bodley gave him information) with persons then residing in said State, for and on the joint account of both Bodley and Parker. That in consequence of the agreement Parker purchased of Samuel Byers, one of the legatees of Joseph Byers, deceased, the one equal half of said Joseph Byers' estate, which the said Samuel was entitled to by will, and did also purchase a legacy, etc. That Parker being the person who contracted, and having paid the greater part of the consideration, etc., took the bonds in his own name but that after his return to this country it was positively agreed that Bodley should refund and pay Parker the one half of the original purchase money, and be equally interested in the contract with Byers, etc. The bill further alleges Bodley has paid his moiety of the purchase money, etc.
The answers of the defendants admit nothing favorable to Bodley's right to recover but throw the burden of proof upon him, and rely upon the statute against frauds and perjuries.
In the consideration of this cause two points are presented for determination--1. Does the contract come within the provisions of the statute of frauds, etc.? and if it does, 2. Are there any circumstances in the case taking it out of the statute?
As to the first point, it was contended in argument--1. That the statute only applies to contracts for the sale of lands tenements, etc.; and it is urged the contract upon which this suit is founded, was for the purchase, and not for the sale hence it was inferred the statute does not apply. Were the construction contended for correct, it might be a question whether the contract alleged in the bill could properly be denominated a contract for the purchase of lands, or whether that part of the bill which alleges an agreement with Parker that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial