Hibbert v. Mackinnon
Wisconsin Supreme Court
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. This is an action in equity to enforce specific performance of an alleged parol contract for the sale and transfer of certain mining stock.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. This is an action in equity to enforce specific performance of an alleged parol contract for the sale and transfer of certain mining stock. In 1883 one Wakefield and six others, being owners of certain land in Ontonagon county, Mich., supposed to contain iron ore, executed to Samuel S. Yaughn and Nathaniel D. Moore a lease thereof known as a mining lease, for the term of thirty years, on certain conditions therein expressed. One of those conditions was that the lease should not be assigned without the consent of the lessors. One Bowen had a…
1Opinion of the CourtLyon, J.
We are of the opinion that this action for specific performance of the alleged contract by Samuel S. Yaughn to deliver to Mr. Moore the 1,000 shares of Aurora stock in question cannot be maintained for two reasons. These are: (1) The alleged contract is not established by clear and satisfactory evidence; and, (2) were it so established, there is no adequate consideration therefor.
I. The circuit court found that in August, 1885, Mr. Yaughn agreed to transfer to Mr. Moore 1,000 shares of Aurora mining stock, in consideration that the latter would consent to a sale of the Sunday Lake mining…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Knoll v. HarveyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
- Smith v. WoodWisconsin Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by4 opinions
- Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. SchuerbrockWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
- Ludwig v. LudwigWisconsin Supreme Court · 1919
- Eckel v. BostwickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1894
- Fontaine v. RileyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1926