Dare v. Foy
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Clinton District Court. — A. P. Barker, Judge. Suit in equity to reform and to compel specific performance of the terms of a written contract. The facts are stated in the opinion. —
1Opinion of the CourtStevens, J.
i. reformation MENTsS:mevi- and sufficiency, I. Prior to June 16, 1913, ■ Frank Foy, appellee herein, was engaged at Des Moines in the business of raising, buy-mg and selling chickens, ducks, geese, pigeons and poultry of all kinds for breeding purposes. He also sold eggs and poultry remedies, incubators, et cetera. He annually distributed a catalogue for the purpose of advertising his business, which was conducted under the name of “Frank Foy,” and “Crescent Poultry Farm Co., Incorporated.” On the date above mentioned, he entered into a contract in writing with Carl *1158Dare, appellant herein,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Kennebec Water District v. City of WatervilleSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1902
- Lindemann v. RuskWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
- Williams v. FarrandMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Bloom v. Home Insurance AgencySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Sartor v. SchadenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1904
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Engel v. VernonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
- International Heating Co. v. Oliver Oil Gas Burner & Machine Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1923
- State v. DanbergSuperior Court of Delaware · 1939
- Kanofsky v. WoerderhoffSupreme Court of Iowa · 1931