Legal Opinion

James L. Callan, Inc. v. Estfred Corp.

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 1963PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHallows, J.

Callan contends its contract with Estfred was specifically enforceable at the time it was entered into because Estfred had legal title to all the lots excepting lot 14 for which it had a contract of purchase with Rose Mat-tioli which gave rise to an equitable title. Callan then contends its right to specific performance is enforceable against Jeteo because Jeteo as successor in title to the land from Freeman was not an innocent purchaser without notice, nor was Freeman. In substantiation of the first argument, Cal-lan relies on 49 Am. Jur., Specific Performance, p. 118, sec. 100, to the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McLennan v. ChurchWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Dells Paper & Pulp Co. v. Willow River Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
  3. McFarlane v. DixonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1922
  4. O'Malley v. MillerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1912

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Pleasure Time, Inc. v. KussWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Anderson v. OnsagerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API