Houlton v. Dunn
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Sherburne county, Baxter, J., denying a motion to set aside an order for judgment for the defendant upon the pleadings and for a new trial. A person may lawfully contract to do as agreed in this case. Powers v. Skinner, 34 Vt. 274; Barry v. Capen, 151 Mass. 99, 23 N. E. 735; Cheshrough y.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Sherburne county, Baxter, J., denying a motion to set aside an order for judgment for the defendant upon the pleadings and for a new trial. A person may lawfully contract to do as agreed in this case. Powers v. Skinner, 34 Vt. 274; Barry v. Capen, 151 Mass. 99, 23 N. E. 735; Cheshrough y. Conover, 21 N. Y. Supp. 5C6; s. c., 140 N. Y. 382, 35 N. E. 633, 634; Beal v. Polhemus, 67 Mich. 130, 34 N. W. 532; Denison v. Crawford County, 48 Iowa, 211. The question is whether, when from the face of the contract it does not appear that…
1Opinion of the CourtBuck, J.
The plaintiff claims to have acquired valuable information in regard to certain pine lands in Bayfield county, Wisconsin, and that the plaintiff and defendant entered into an agreement, by the terms of which the defendant was to enter into possession of 160 acres of such pine lands, belonging to the United States, not then in market, nor subject to entry, and to hold the same until it could be purchased from the government; and the plaintiff, for a consideration to be-paid by the defendant, agreed to procure such legislation from congress as would enable the defendant to secure the land in…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Oscanyan v. Arms Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Trist v. ChildSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Tool Co. v. NorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1865
- Woodstock Iron Co. v. Richmond & Danville Extension Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Clippinger v. HepbaughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1843
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Ames v. Waterloo & Cedar Falls Rapid Transit Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1903
- Hollister v. UlviSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
- Goodrich v. Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1924
- Houlton v. NicholWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Adams v. East Boston Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1920
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.