Case Name: Scott and another, vs. Thorpe and another
Court: New York Court of Chancery
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1833-02-11
Citations: 1 Edw. Ch. 512
Docket Number: 
Parties: Scott and another, vs. Thorpe and another.
Judges: 
Reporter: Edwards' Chancery Reports
Volume: 1
Pages: 512–513

Head Matter:
Scott and another, vs. Thorpe and another.
Purchasers of real estate cannot suggest their* own alienisrfi as a bar to - specific performance/
February 11, 1833.
The hill in this cause was filed to compel thé spécific'pérformance of an agreement'for the purchase of a house and lot aj Ellenville in this state.
The defendants, in their joint answer, alleged, amongst other things, that the complainants, at the time the aforesaid agreement was-made with the defendants, knew that they were foreigners (aliens) and took advantage of them in-the price of the . aforesaid house and lot-; and the defendants had been- led- to believe, by conversations with-the complainants, that foreigners could hold lands in the same mannér as other persons.
Mr. N. Dane Ellingwood, for the complainants. ■
Mr. Peter V. Remseh-, for the defendants.

Opinion:
The Vice-Chancellor.-
There aré no'circumstances in this case to show unfairness in' making the contract: the defendants were Englishmen just arrived in this country and voluntarily entered into an agreement with the complainants.
The defendants have suggested their being aliens. This point the court' cannot look to while it comes from them. They could have obviated- this difficulty themselves: by making the necessary deposition-or affirmation and having it filed and recorded by the secretary of state: 1 R. S. 720, § 15. There is nothing to prevent a decree for specific performance and there must be the usual reference to the master to report upon the title. The question of costs and all further directions 1 l are reserved.
Order accordingly.