Broaddus v. Ward
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to Boone Circuit Court. relies upon the following points: — 1. The decree should have been for complainant. There had been a waiver of the forfeiture upon all lots, at the sale, the complainant purchased. 2. The forfeiture could have been compensated for in damages, and the court should have directed the inquiry. 3. The purchase money should have been refunded. 4. The defendants, re-selling the property, had no right to enforce a forfeiture. relies upon the following…
Read the full summary
ERROR to Boone Circuit Court. relies upon the following points: — 1. The decree should have been for complainant. There had been a waiver of the forfeiture upon all lots, at the sale, the complainant purchased. 2. The forfeiture could have been compensated for in damages, and the court should have directed the inquiry. 3. The purchase money should have been refunded. 4. The defendants, re-selling the property, had no right to enforce a forfeiture. relies upon the following points: — < 1. Under the written agreement, the complainant, Broaddus, was bound to improve the lot purchased by him, by…
1Opinion of the CourtTompkins, Judge
Jeremiah Broaddus, the complainant in the Circuit Court, states in his bill, that, on the seventeenth day of November, in the year 1825, he contracted with, and became the purchaser from, John Ward, Lemon Parker, Abraham Barnes, and John Gray, of a certain lot of ground in the town of Rocheport, Boone county, known on the plat of said town as lot No. (45,) for the sum of $47 50, payable in two equal instalments, at six and twelve months after the day of said purchase; that the said John Ward, Lemon Parker, Abraham Barnes, and John Gray, were, at the time aforesaid, proprietors of the land,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- State ex inf. Carnahan v. JonesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915