Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Zantzinger Vs. Ketch

Zantzinger vs Ketch

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1793
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/78083

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
4 U.S. 132
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Zantzinger

Respondent

Ketch

Excerpt

zantzinger v. ketch - 4 u.s. 132 (1793) u.s. supreme court zantzinger v. ketch, 4 u.s. 132 (1793) 4 u.s. 132 (dall.) zantzinger v. ketch. supreme court of pennsylvania. april term, 1793 this was an action of debt on articles of agreement to pay 135l., in two instalments, for lands bought by the defendant from the plaintiff; and in the articles it was stipulated, that 'the deed of conveyance shall be made to the said michael ketch at the first payment.' the defendant offered the parol testimony of a witness, who was present at the execution of the articles, to shew that by the expression, 'the deed of conveyance,' the parties meant and understood, 'a deed conveying the land free of all incumberances.' page 4 u.s. 132, 133 2 vez. 299. hurst v. fell, in the supreme court of pennsylvania. the evidence was opposed, as tending to contradict the deed, whose expressions were clear, and did not require explanation. the court. the court, however, upon the authority of hurst v. fell, admitted the evidence, though with great reluctance; and declaring that they would reserve the point. but as the verdict was for the full amount of the plaintiff's demand, the question was not revived.(b) c. smith, for the plaintiff. hamilton, for the defendant. (b) this cause was tried at carlisle, nisi prius, on the 15th o f may 793, before shppen and bradford, justices.

Full Judgment

ZANTZINGER v. KETCH - 4 U.S. 132 (1793)
U.S. Supreme Court ZANTZINGER v. KETCH, 4 U.S. 132 (1793)

4 U.S. 132 (Dall.)

Zantzinger
v.
Ketch.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

April Term, 1793

THIS was an action of debt on articles of agreement to pay 135l., in two instalments, for lands bought by the defendant from the plaintiff; and in the articles it was stipulated, that 'the deed of conveyance shall be made to the said Michael Ketch at the first payment.'

The defendant offered the parol testimony of a witness, who was present at the execution of the articles, to shew that by the expression, 'the deed of conveyance,' the parties meant and understood, 'a deed conveying the land free of all incumberances.'

Page 4 U.S. 132, 133

2 Vez. 299. Hurst v. Fell, in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

The evidence was opposed, as tending to contradict the deed, whose expressions were clear, and did not require explanation.

THE COURT.

The COURT, however, upon the authority of Hurst v. Fell, admitted the evidence, though with great reluctance; and declaring that they would reserve the point. But as the verdict was for the full amount of the plaintiff's demand, the question was not revived.(b)

C. Smith, for the plaintiff.

Hamilton, for the defendant.

(b) This cause was tried at Carlisle, Nisi Prius, on the 15th o f May 793, before SHPPEN and BRADFORD, Justices.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial