Wells v. Wells

Decision Date30 June 1845
Citation38 N.C. 596,3 Ired.Eq. 596
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesHENRY WELLS v. ROBERT P. WELLS.
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

A. agreed with B., that, in consideration of a certain sum, he would convey to B. a certain tract of land, and the purchase money was secured by notes payable in three years. It was further agreed, that B. should take possession of the premises, and should pay, annually, for three years, a certain portion of the crop; and if B. paid for the land by such annual instalments, in three years, the deed in fee was to be given; if not, the annual payment was to be considered as rent, and at the end of the three years, the land was to be surrendered by B. Held, that if the annual payments amounted at the expiration of four years to the price originally agreed to be given for the land, the bargainee claiming that they should be so applied, although the bargainor insisted that the payments should be considered only as payments of rent, the bargainee was entitled to a conveyance of the premises.

The time mentioned in the contract for completing the purchase of land, is not usually considered in a Court of Equity, as of the essence of the contract.

Cause removed from the Court of Equity of Buncombe County, by consent of the parties, at the Fall Term, 1844.

The following facts were disclosed by the pleadings and proofs.

On the 10th day of November, in the year 1836, the defendant, for the consideration of $300, executed in writing, under his hand and seal, an agreement with the plaintiff, to make him a good title in fee to a tract of land of one hundred acres, more or less, it being the land which the defendant purchased of David Roberts, lying in Buncombe county, on the waters of Haw Branch. The purchase money was secured by notes of hand, payable in instalments in three years from the date of the agreement. It was, at the same time, by a separate instrument, further agreed by and between the parties, that Henry Wells was then to be let into possession, and to hold the place for three years, by paying 125 bushels of corn per annum as rent; “but that the said 125 bushels of corn per annum is to go to pay for the place at cash prices, if the said Henry Wells pays for the place in three years; if not, the annual payment of the corn is to be the rent, and the said Henry Wells is to give up the possession of the place to Robert P. Wells, with all improvements, &c.” The plaintiff in his bill states, that he has paid to the defendant and his assignees of the said notes, the principal money and interest; that the entire payment was completed in the year 1840; that he then called for a legal conveyance of the said land from the defendant, which he refused to execute. The prayer of the bill is for a specific execution of the said contract.

The defendant in his answer, admits the written contract of purchase or lease as stated in the bill. And he further says, that the plaintiff failed to pay the notes within...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Durant v. Comegys
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1891
    ...not of the essence of the contract, and the purchaser does not forfeit his right of purchase by neglect to pay at the day. (Wells v. Wells, 3 Ired. Eq. 596; Runnels v. Jackson, 1 How. (Miss.) 358; v. Gratz, 6 Wheat. 533; Hepburn v. Auld, 5 Cranch, 270; Taylor v. Longworth, 14 Pet. 174; Will......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT