Housekeeper Pub. Co. v. Swift
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
In Error to tlie Circuit Court of tlie United States for the District of Minnesota. This is an action to recover §25,000 and interest, which is the alleged balance of the purchase price of a printing and publishing plant, and of the good will of tlie business of publishing a newspaper. The plaintiff in error, the Housekeeper Publishing Company, a corporation, conveyed this plant and good will to the wives of the defendants in error, Lucian Swift and William JO.
Read the full summary
In Error to tlie Circuit Court of tlie United States for the District of Minnesota. This is an action to recover §25,000 and interest, which is the alleged balance of the purchase price of a printing and publishing plant, and of the good will of tlie business of publishing a newspaper. The plaintiff in error, the Housekeeper Publishing Company, a corporation, conveyed this plant and good will to the wives of the defendants in error, Lucian Swift and William JO. Haskell, and received §25,000 for them. The vendor insists that it. made this conveyance in performance of a contract which it made…
1Opinion of the CourtSanborn, Circuit Judge
This is an action on a contract. The plaintiff has sold and delivered its property, and the defendants have paid it §23,000 for it. It seeks to recover §25,000 more, with interest, on the ground that the defendants agreed, not only to pay the §25,000 which they have paid, but also to give their promissory notes for §25,000 in addition, or, in effect, to pay §50,000 for the property. It is obvious that there can be no recovery here, and that the complaint states no cause of action unless it shows that there was an existing contract by the defendants to give these notes, and to pay §50,-000 in…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Chicago v. SheldonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Thompson v. Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Insurance Co. v. MowrySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Hudson Canal Co. v. Pennsylvania Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1869
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- Cougar Bay Co., Inc. v. BristolIdaho Supreme Court · 1979
- Manhattan Life Ins. v. WrightCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1903
- Frierson v. International Agricultural Corp.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1940
- Sherman v. SweenyWashington Supreme Court · 1902
- Riverside Coal Co. v. American Coal Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.