Davenport v. Whisler
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Scott District Court It is alleged in the petition that on the 30th day of July, 1873, the defendant, Whisler, was the owner in fee of certain real esjtate; that there was a mortgage upon the same; that the plaintiff contracted to purchase said property from Whisler; and both of said defendants joined in the execution of a bond for a deed to plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Scott District Court It is alleged in the petition that on the 30th day of July, 1873, the defendant, Whisler, was the owner in fee of certain real esjtate; that there was a mortgage upon the same; that the plaintiff contracted to purchase said property from Whisler; and both of said defendants joined in the execution of a bond for a deed to plaintiff. The petition further shows that upon the delivery of the bond plaintiff paid Whisler the sum of $2200, the same being in full-of the purchase money; that the obligation of defendants by said bond was that- Whisler should, on the…
1Opinion of the CourtNotebook, J.
i pleading : demurrer. I. It is urged by appellee that the demurrer is too general and should be disregarded. We believe f^is position to be correct as to the first division or grounc] 0f demurrer. But the second ground or cause, and that which we think raises the real question in the case, is sufficiently specific. It states that the facts stated in the petition avoid the cause of action because it appears upon the face of the petition that the defendant, Shields, has *290been discharged fr.om his obligation by the acts of Davenport and Whisler. It is claimed that the acts of Davenport and…
2Cited by14 opinions
- State Board of Administration v. RoquemoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Bowers v. CottrellIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
- McNair v. SockriterSupreme Court of Iowa · 1924
- Miller v. KempSupreme Court of Virginia · 1931
- Gray v. Van GordonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1919
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.