Turley v. . Nowell

Pearson, C. J.

The plaintiff is entitled to a specific performance of the contract. The parties were their own judges as to the value of the property and the value of Confederate notes, and there is no allegation of fraud or imposition. Indeed the only ground on which the defendant resists the equity of the plaintiff is the fact that by the result of the war Confederate notes became of no value, but he needed such notes at the time he made the contract, accepted them in payment for the land, and must abide the loss.

That the contract was not illegal is settled, Phillips v. Hooker, ante, 193.

Per Curiam.

Decree for the plaintiff.