Case ID: ny_221/html/0557-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Eli H. Bishop, Appellant, v. Smith N. Decker et al., Respondents.
    (Argued May 18, 1917;
    decided June 5, 1917.)
    
      Bishop v. Decker, 166 App. Div. 890, affirmed.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 22,1914, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. This action was brought to recover an abatement in the contract price of a tract of land upon the exchange by the plaintiff of a flat owned by him for this tract and another piece of Long Island acreage owned' by the defendants. The action is framed upon the theory of legal remedy affording a party a reformation of a contract and conveyance of real property made under a mutual mistake as to the quantity conveyed and granting an abatement of the contract price for a deficiency. Under the contract of sale the tract of land in question was to contain forty-five acres, more or less. It actually contained twenty-five and thirty-six one-hundredths acres. The defense was that the contract provided for a trade in bulk.
    
      Charles J. Ryan for appellant.
    
      William S. Pettit and Charles C. Bunker for respondents.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Hogan, Pound, Crane and Andrews, JJ.