-
McKinney, J., delivered the opinion of the court:
There is no ground shown for discharging the petitioner from his purchase. The mere clerical error in the number of the lot sold is of' no importance. The
*142 lot. actually sold and purchased by the petitioner was the same lot intended to be sold. The purchaser got the property he intended to purchase. The error in the number of the lot misled no one. It might well have been rejected as surplusage, as the description of the lot was sufficiently ^ certain without it. Though in correcting the error in this respect by a subsequent order, the Chancellor acted properly.Decree affirmed.
Document Info
Citation Numbers: 1 Thompson 141, 1 Shan. Cas. 84
Judges: McKinney
Filed Date: 9/15/1858
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024