Hennessy v. Woolworth
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE ' CIRCUIT COURT OF ’ THE UNITED STATES FOR , THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. The court stated the case as follows: The appellees, S. B. Wool worth, and Clara Woolworth, his wife, the plaintiffs below, claiming to have been for more than ten years prior to the 13th of June, 1883, in the constant, actual and lawful possession of lots 4 and 9, block 20, Robert and Randall’s addition to St. Paul, Minnesota, and averring that the appellant, the defendant below,…
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE ' CIRCUIT COURT OF ’ THE UNITED STATES FOR , THE DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. The court stated the case as follows: The appellees, S. B. Wool worth, and Clara Woolworth, his wife, the plaintiffs below, claiming to have been for more than ten years prior to the 13th of June, 1883, in the constant, actual and lawful possession of lots 4 and 9, block 20, Robert and Randall’s addition to St. Paul, Minnesota, and averring that the appellant, the defendant below, wrongfully asserted an interest therein adverse to them, brought this suit in one of the courts of the State, for the purpose…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harlan
After stating the facts as above reported^ he continued: It is not claimed, as it could not well be, that the writing. executed by plaintiffs on Dec. 8, 1881, invested Kavanaugh with authority to assent, on behalf of the appellees, to the terms contained in the agreement of December 23,1881. Authority to sell the lots for “ $10,000 net ” to the plaintiffs was not authority to impose upon them the burdensome conditions embodied in the last writing. Besides, it is clear from the evidence that Hennessey declined to enter upon' negotiations-for the lots unless Kavanaugh obtained from appellees…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Marble Co. v. RipleySupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Willard v. TayloeSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Colson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1817
- Carr v. DuvalSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- Seymour v. DelanceyNew York Court of Chancery · 1822
3Cited by93 opinions
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. QuarlesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
- Di Giovanni v. Camden Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Pope Manufacturing Co. v. GormullySupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Dalzell v. Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Cheney v. LibbySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
88 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.