clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search		 search for:
clear space
white space
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 3, Page 24   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

24 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.
THOMAS D. HUNT ET AL.
vs. JULY TERM, 1849.
JOHN STULL.
[CONSTRUCTION OF THE WORDS "MORE OR LESS" IN A CONTRACT FOR THE
SALE or LAND.]
The words "more or less," or other equivalent words, used in contracts and
conveyances, should be construed to qualify the representation of quantity,
in such a manner, that if made in good faith, neither party should be entitled
to any relief, on account of a deficiency or a surplus.
In a contract for the sale of land for a gross sum, in which, by the introduction
of the words "more or less," the representation of quantity is qualified, the
number of acres is to be considered as merely descriptive, and not of its es-
sence, and, in the absence of fraud, deficiency or surplus in the quantity of
land, will not avail to vacate the contract.
There may be, however, cases in which the deficiency, from its magnitude,
would raise a presumption of fraud, imposition or mistake, and in such
cases, the words "more or less," would not be permitted to stand in the
way of relief.
[The bill in this case was filed for the purpose of enforcing a
contract for the sale of lands. A decree for a sale was passed
by default on the 30th of May, 1849, and after an advertise-
ment of sale by the trustee, a petition was filed by the defend-
ant, the vendee, to suspend the proceedings of the trustee, va-
cate the decree, and for leave to file his answer, charging mis-
representation by the vendor as to the number of acres in the
tract of land sold him, or that the decree might be allowed to
stand as a security for the performance of the contract, after
such deductions from the purchase money as toe petitioner
might be entitled to, on account of deficiency in the quantity
of land bought. The matter of the petition was set down for
hearing, and having been argued on notes by the respective
counsel, the following opinion was delivered.]
THE CHANCELLOR:
On the thirtieth of May last, a decree passed for the Bale of
a parcel of land, for the payment of the purchase money there-
for, due from the defendant to the plaintiffs, upon allegations

  		clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Reports of Cases in the High Court of Chancery of Maryland 1846-1854
Volume 200, Volume 3, Page 24   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
   << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.

Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!

An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  October 06, 2023
Maryland State Archives