Smutz v. Holliday
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Henry District Court. — James D. Smyti-i, Judge. Action at law to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract. Trial to a jury, and at the close of plaintiff’s evidence, the trial court directed a verdict for defendant E. E. Holliday on the ground that he had not obligated himself in the written contract to pay for the property, and that plaintiff made no claim in the petition against him. We do not understand appellant to complain of this ruling.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Henry District Court. — James D. Smyti-i, Judge. Action at law to recover damages for an alleged breach of contract. Trial to a jury, and at the close of plaintiff’s evidence, the trial court directed a verdict for defendant E. E. Holliday on the ground that he had not obligated himself in the written contract to pay for the property, and that plaintiff made no claim in the petition against him. We do not understand appellant to complain of this ruling. Some further testimony was then taken on behalf of plaintiff, and at the close of all the plaintiff’s testimony, the court then…
1Opinion of the CourtPreston, J.
On August 19, 1915, the plaintiff and defendant Belle Holliday entered into a written contract for the sale of certain real estate, which contract was to be performed March 1, 1916. Though plaintiff’s wife .and defendant’s husband signed the contract, the defendant’s husband, E. B. Holliday, did not obligate himself to pay for the property. The vital part of the contract follows:
“Said W. A. Smutz agrees to convey his home in Van Burén County, Iowa, consisting of (5%) five and one-eighth acres (more or less) to Mrs. Ed. R. Holliday for the sum of ($6,000.00) six thousand dollars, ($100.00) one…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Chadima v. KovarSupreme Court of Iowa · 1915
- Miller v. McConnellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1916
- Nelson v. WilsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1888
3Cited by1 opinion
- Legvold v. OlsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1922