Vought v. Porter
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the CourtHolt, J.
Defendant appeals from an order denying his motion in the alternative for judgment non obstante or a new trial.
The facts leading up to and surrounding the alleged oral contract upon which the verdict was based are, in substance, these:
The deceased, Ole Reierson, had acted as agent in selling a farm of 160 acres in Iowa, near LeRoy this state, for Harry Peterson to plaintiff under a contract at the price of $23,200; $1,000 cash; $8,200 to be paid March 1, 1920, and balance by assuming two mortgages for $14,000 existing against the farm. The payment of March 1, 1920, was not met. In the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Mathwig v. StrandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1916
- Graceville State Bank v. HofschildSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Smith v. GloverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Fisher v. PlimptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
- Bringgold v. StuckySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hatlestad v. Mutual Trust Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1936
- Schmitt v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1926
- Vought v. PorterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928