TEITLEMAN v. PORTER SMITH CO

Where vendors executed a contract for the sale of real estate which was not acknowledged by all of them, but later they executed deeds acknowledged by all parties, and were at all times ready, able and willing to comply with the contract and transfer title to the property, held, that the answer of the defendants to the vendors' bill for specific performance of contract, alleging that two of the vendors failed to acknowledge the contract, and that the contract therefore lacked mutuality of remedy and was unenforceable, did not state a defense.

PER CURIAM.

The decree appealed from will be affirmed, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice-Chancellor Ingersoll.

For affirmance — THE CHIEF-JUSTICE, TRENCHARD, PARKER, MINTURN, KALISCH, BLACK, KATZENBACH, CAMPBELL, LLOYD, WHITE, VAN BUSKIRK, McGLENNON, KAYS, HETFIELD, DEAR, JJ. 15.

For reversal — None.