Minion v. Adams
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Humboldt District Court. — E. F. Coyle, Judge. Action for specific performance and for injunction. There was a decree for plaintiff in the first case and for the defendants in the second. The facts will be sufficiently stated in the opinion. Adams et al., defendants in the first case and plaintiffs in the second, appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
1- formance fEE” forceawe: eflegiee of pioof. In the first case, plaintiff, Minion, brought his action in equity, asking that the executors of the estate of A. Mgurvived his wife, M. L. Adams, specifically perform a parol contract alleged to have been entered into between said Minion, plaintiff, and M. L. Adams and A. M'. Adams, a copartnership, engaged in the publication of the “Humboldt Independent,” claiming that, by the terms of such contract, M. L. Adams and A. M. Adams agreed that, if Minion, the plaintiff, would remain in the employ of said partnership and the survivor thereof, in the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Chehak v. BattlesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- Stiles v. BreedSupreme Court of Iowa · 1911
- Holmes v. ConnableSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
- Bevington v. BevingtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1907
- McElhenney v. HendricksSupreme Court of Iowa · 1891
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Stewart v. SchnepfArizona Supreme Court · 1945
- Hart v. HartSupreme Court of Iowa · 1917
- In Re Estate of KahlSupreme Court of Iowa · 1930
- Groh v. MillerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1923
- Kline v. Indiana Trust Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1919