Horn v. Buck

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania March 14, 1887

Horn v. Buck, 5 Sadler 480 (Pa. 1887)

8 A. 609

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam :

' The uncontradicted evidence is that the defendant paid no money to his father at the time the deed was executed. • The contention is whether he was to pay the full consideration mentioned *486thereafter, or was the land a gift to the son. This is purely a question of fact for the jury, to which it was properly submitted.

Judgment affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name: Jonathan Horn, Admr. of George Buck, Plff. in Err. v. James Monroe Buck
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Published
Syllabus: In assumpsit by an executor for the unpaid balance of purchase money of land conveyed by the testator to his son, the question whether the son was to pay the full money consideration mentioned in the deed or was to have the land partly as a gift is a question for the jury. Note. — Where there is any evidence to show that the property was transferred by the decedent as a gift, the question is for the jury. Patterson v. Dushane, 115 Pa. 334, 8 Atl. 440; Flanigan v. Flanigan, 115 Pa. 233, 9 Atl. 157; Jacques v. Fourthman, 137 Pa. 428, 20 Atl. 802; Osterhout’s Estate, 148 Pa. 223, 23 Atl. 1069; Kulp v. March, 181 Pa. 627, 59 Am. St. Rep. 687, 37 Atl. 913.