Perry v. Dillrance
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Dtibuque District Cowrt. — Hon. D. J. Lenehan, Judge. Action for specific performance of a contract. There was a decree for the plaintiff, and the defendant and intervenor appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Dtibuque District Cowrt. — Hon. D. J. Lenehan, Judge. Action for specific performance of a contract. There was a decree for the plaintiff, and the defendant and intervenor appeal. The facts, in this case, briefly stated, are that the plaintiff, in August, 1889, entered into a written contract with the defendant, J. W. Dillrance, then the fee simple owner, for the purchase of certain lots in the city of Dubuque, he agreeing to pay the defendant five thousand dollars therefor, in consideration of which the defendant was to execute to him a good •warranty deed. The plaintiff tendered…
1Opinion of the CourtKinne, J.
1. Homestead ¡ ' agreementto pertormiíee: yenorfint61’" I. It is contended that the intervenor 'is not a necessary party to this suit, and that her petition should, iff any event, be dismissed. • **. / it is said that all'of'the wife’s rights are fully protected by the husband’s answer, It was held in McClure v. Braniff, 75 Iowa, 43, that, when the right of the wife was actual and existing, she could protect it by intervening in a suit brought against her husband touching the homestead property. We see no reason why she •should not be permitted to intervene for the protection of her homestead…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Donaldson v. LampreySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
- Mcclure v. BraniffSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Cotton v. Hamil & Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1882
- Wilson v. DanielsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1890
- Leonard v. Ingraham & MarshallSupreme Court of Iowa · 1882
3Cited by2 opinions
- Maguire v. HansonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898
- Painter v. SteffenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1893