Green's Cr. 541... 641 State v. Wolcott, 21 Conn. 272. 86 State Bank v. Evans, 15 N. J. L. 155.. 706 Thatcher v. Dinsmore, 5 Mass. 299. 50 34 699 23, 30 218 Ct. 661 Stephen's Appeal, 8 W. & S. 186 320 Stewart v. Cooley, 23 Am. Rep. 690, 692. 694 5 Thompson v. Mercer Co., 40 Ill. 379.. 512 494 Thompson v. Peter, 12 Wheat. 565 Thompson v. Strickland, 52 Miss. 574, 31 Thorington v. Smith, 8 Wall. 1.. Thorp v. Keokuk Coal Co., 48 N. Y.253.. 535, 536 Thorpe v. Eyre, 1 A. & E. 926 14 Tindall v. Bright, Minor (Ala.), 103.. 435 Titus v. State, 42 Texas, 378. 478 Tobey v. Wood, ante, p. 27 Todd v. Clapp, 118 Mass. 495. 725 198 56 707 562 431 28 638 686 562 194 Todd v. Lee, 15 Wis. 365; 16 id. 480.. 486 259 450 750 30 Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway 301 748, 749 Stone v. Fairbury, Pontiac & Northwestern R. R. Co., 68 Ill. 394 324, 325 Stone v. Wood, 7 Cow. 453 21 Storrs v. Utica, 17 N. Y. 108. 474 Story v. Elliot, 8 Cow. 27, 30 629, 630 Toledo, Wabash & Western Railway 301 494 47 493 48 Stover v. Kendall, 1 Cold. 557. 35 Strickland v. Woolworth, 3 T. & C.286, 535 93 Strong v. Darling, 9 Ohio, 201. 677 Strong v. Strong, 9 Cush. 560, 576; 12 id. 135 46, 56 Stuart v. Kinsella, 14 Minu. 524 245 31 77 Sturgis v. Boyer, 24 How. (U.S.). Treadwell v. Halloway, 46 Cal. 547; s. 713 669 511 126 570 Sullivan v. Jones, 2 Gray, 570 Sullivan v. Mayor, 53 N. Y. 652 243 Sutton v. Florida, 12 Fla. 135... 562 Swartwout v. Payne, 19 Johns. 294.. 181 Tucker v. West & Mock, 29 Ark. 386.. 577 51 Tudor v. Tudor, 17 B. Monr. 383, 389, 35 433.... 70 Tullay v. Reed, 1 C. & P. 6. 147 Swan v. North British Australasian Co., 2 H. & C. 175, 189, 190.. 71 Swann v. Broome, 3 Bur. 1595, 1599, 1601. 629 Tuller, Matter of, 79 Ill. 99 234 198 352 630, 631 Swift v. Tyson, 16 Pet. 1... Swift v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Turner v. Horner, Adm'r, 29 Ark. 440... 586 644 154 232 675 Tweed v. Insurance Co., 2 Wall. 44 Twitchell v. Commonwealth, 7 Wall. 321... 450 558 Tyson v. Thomas, McC. & Y. 119.. .... 675 570 Taafe v. Downes, 3 Moore's P. C. 41 697 Underhill V. Agawam Ins. Co., 6 103 452 47 Waterman v. Vose, 43 Me. 501. Waters v. Quimby, 3 Dutch. 198.. Watkins, Ex parte, 3 Pet. 193... Watrous v. Blair, 32 Iowa, 58.. Watson v. Bennett, 12 Barb. 196. Watson v. Stone, 40 Ala. 451... 73 218 693 77 509 723 44 Wearse v. Pierce, 24 Pick. 141. 122 44 44 Webb v. Baird, 6 Ind. 13. 624 717 Webb v. Page, 1 Carr. & Kirw. 23...613, Webb v. Pritchett, 1 H. & B. 284.. 243 Webster v. Hudson R. R. R. Co., 38 N. Y. 260 230 657 16 578 724 709 35 243 201 384 Vail v. Durant, 7 Allen, 408. 536 229, 231 Van Deusen v. Sweet, 51 N. Y. 383.. 506 Vandike v. Rosskam, 67 Penn. St. 330.. 162 Van Eps v. Dillaye, 6 Barb. 244... 248 Van Ingen v. Whitman, 62 N. Y. 513... 162 Van Keuren v. Parmelee, 2 N. Y. 525.. 496 Van Leuven v. First National Bank, 54 N. Y. 6.1.... 211 Vanscoyoc v. Kimler, 77 Ill. 151. 271, 272 Van Slyke v. Trempealeau Co. Ins. Co., 39 Wis. 39; s. c., 20 Am. Rep. 50..... 540 Van Vechten v. Paddock, 12 Johns. 181. Weightman v. Washington, 1 Black (U. Welch v. Priest, 8 Allen, 165. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Pacific & Atlantic Telegraph Co., 49 Ill. Withers v. Buckley, 20 How. (U. S.) 84. Withington v. Warren, 10 Metc. 431, 433 Yale v. Dederer, 18 N. Y. 265; 22 id. 454. 558 142, 835 Yates v. Lansing, 5 Johns. 282..690, 699, 701 Yeates v. Williams, 5 Ark. 684.. 56 16 35 192 338 ..68, 73 467 Wolcott v. Winchester, 15 Gray, 461... Wood v. Willis, 110 Mass. 454.. Young v. Miller, 6 Gray, 152. 201 Zeigler v. Zeigler, 2 S. & R. 286.... 56 Zimmerinan v. Rote, 75 Penn. St. 188.. 677 Yoe v. People, 49 Ill. 410.. 54 Young v. Grote, 4 Bing. 253; 8. C., 12 69, 70, 71, 73, 75 16 778 433 56 77 CASES IN THE SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS. PICKMAN V. TRINITY CHURCH. (123 Mass. 1.) Mistake vj ̊ jact — When excess of payment for land recoverable — Title to land in action for money. Where, upon a sale of land, the quantity is made an essential element of the bargain and is relied on to fix the price, and by mistake of fact there is a deficiency in the quantity paid for and purporting to be conveyed, the excess of payment may be recovered at law, but not in equity. The rule, that the title to land cannot be tried in an action for money had and received, is not applicable where the action does not involve the title to the lands for which such money was paid, but only of lands of a third party upon which those lands are bounded. Land was sold at a fixed price per square foot; the grantee, relying upon a survey procured by the grantor, paid the agreed price for the quantity thus indicated; the deed stated the same sun as its consideration, purported to state the true length of the lines and tne correct number of square feet, and bounded the grant on one side by T.'s tand; whether the amount was correctly stated depended on the question wnether the grantor or T. owned a strip of land lying between lots conceded to be owned by them respectively, and conveyed by the deed in question. Heta, that if T. owned the strip, an action for money had and received would he to recover the excess of the price paid, but that a'bill in equity would no.. |