Court Opinion

ID: 7376302
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-28 23:47:51.125673+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:21:12.671237
License: Public Domain

The Court
(Fitzhugh, J., contra,)
refused to instruct the jury that the agreement and deed did not make a good defence at law; being of opinion that the agreement bound the plaintiff to give a release upon the execution of' the deed, and a court of equity would have compelled him to execute it; and that in assumpsit it *451ought to be admitted in evidence on the general issue, it being a fraud upon the defendant as well as upon the other creditors that the plaintiff should refuse to execute the deed after the others had executed it. See Heathcote v. Crookshanks, 2 T. R. 24; Jackson v. Duchaire, 3 T. R. 551; and Jackson v. Lomas, 4 T. R. 166.