Legal Opinion

Mecaskey v. Dunlap

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided October 28, 1925No. 2535. [fn*]Published

1Opinion

HALL, O. J., and JACKSON, J.

We concur in the disposition made of this appeal by Judge RANDOLPH, because the allegations of the petition as against a general demurrer are sufficient to entitle plaintiff to damages. The prayer is for specific performance and, in the alternative, for damages. The petition, when considered in connection with the contract and mortgages, attached and made exhibits thereto, shows that the plaintiff is not entitled to specific performance. The contract is incomplete and is uncertain, and it would be inequitable to require the defendant to assume the payment of the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Norris v. HuntTexas Supreme Court · 1879
  2. Watson v. BakerTexas Supreme Court · 1888
  3. Fulton v. RobinsonTexas Supreme Court · 1881
  4. Johnson v. GrangerTexas Supreme Court · 1879
  5. Boehl v. WadgymarTexas Supreme Court · 1881

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API