Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Gibbs v. Claar

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided January 18, 1938No. 6479Published

1Concurrence

AILSHIE, J.,

Concurring in Part. — For reasons hereafter stated, I concur in affirming the order of the trial court approving and confirming the sale of the property in question to respondent, the Cosgriff Outdoor Advertising Company, Inc., for $5,026, but I think the case should be remanded to the trial court for the purpose of determining the amount and awarding to appellant Gibbs interest on the down payment made on his bid, together with any other legitimate costs and expenses incurred by him in purchasing the property, including necessary expense he may have incurred in making preparation…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Crystal Pier Co. v. SchneiderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1919
  2. Rowe v. StevensIdaho Supreme Court · 1913

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API