Saunders v. Stults
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Winnebago District Court. — M. F. Edwards, Judge. Appeal from the action of the district court in refusing to confirm a sale made by its receiver. Opinion states the facts.
1Opinion of the CourtGaynor, J.
Prior to the happening of the matters involved in this controversy, the defendants Stults had contracted to purchase 790 acres of land. Finding themselves unable to finance the purchase, they induced the plaintiffs, Saunders and the two Sopers,, to do so. A contract was entered into between these parties, by the terms of which the land was to be sold, and the sum realized divided between them, in proportion to the interests of each, as fixed in the contract. It appears that a sale could not be effected within the time limited by the contract, and a disagree*1091ment arose between them as to the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Langyher v. Patterson & BashSupreme Court of Virginia · 1883
- Todd v. Gallego Mills Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1888
- Lynch and Another v. Baxter and Wife Adm'x.Texas Supreme Court · 1849
- Terry v. Coles' Ex'orSupreme Court of Virginia · 1885
- Henderson v. HerrodMississippi Supreme Court · 1852
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Gibbs v. ClaarIdaho Supreme Court · 1938
- Criswell v. CriswellSupreme Court of Iowa · 1939
- State ex rel. Spillman v. American State BankNebraska Supreme Court · 1931
- Continental Oil Company v. McNAIR REALTY COMPANYMontana Supreme Court · 1960
- Damrow v. Iowa & Omaha Short Line RailwaySupreme Court of Iowa · 1921
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.