Legal Opinion

Louk v. Patten

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided October 29, 1937No. 6393PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBudge, J.

March 30, 1934, respondent, Minnie Louk, procured a judgment against appellant George E. Patten for the sum of $1,053.30, the suit arising out of a breaching of appellant Patten’s contract of marriage with respondent. This action was instituted by respondent to set aside a deed of con veyance, made at about the time of the breaching of the contract above referred to, from appellant Patten to his daughter, appellant Leora M. Howell, conveying title to lot 7 of Block 75, Riverside addition to the city of Idaho Falls, upon the grounds that it was given to hinder, delay and defraud respondent in…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Hill v. PorterIdaho Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Hawkins v. Mapes-Reeve Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
  3. Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance v. Jewell-Loudermilk Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1927
  4. Burton v. BaylyIdaho Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Weber v. Pend D'Oreille Mining & Reduction Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. State v. LinnIdaho Supreme Court · 1969
  2. State v. SnoderlyIdaho Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Cantor v. Union Mutual Life Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1977
  4. Carey v. LaffertyIdaho Supreme Court · 1938
  5. Murdock Acceptance Corp. v. AdcoxMississippi Supreme Court · 1962

9 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