Legal Opinion

Zimmerman v. Chambers

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided February 3, 1891PublishedCited by 5 opinions

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. The case is fully stated in the opinion. They argued that equity will not entertain a bill for specific performance of a contract to convey personalty. 3 Pomeroy, Eq. sec. 1492; Fry on Spec. Performance, sec. 29 et seq. Plaintiff had an ample remedy at law in an action for the conversion of the property.

Read the full summary

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County. The case is fully stated in the opinion. They argued that equity will not entertain a bill for specific performance of a contract to convey personalty. 3 Pomeroy, Eq. sec. 1492; Fry on Spec. Performance, sec. 29 et seq. Plaintiff had an ample remedy at law in an action for the conversion of the property. He had not entitled himself to equitable relief by performing or readiness to perform on his part. 3 Pom-eroy, Eq. sec. 1407. Defendant had a right to dissolve the partnership, it being for no definite time. 2 Lindley, Partn. 570-2; Story,…

1Opinion of the CourtOrton, J.

The findings of fact are, in substance, as follows: On the 8th day of May, 1888, John W. Zimmerman, (deceased), and the appellant together executed a contract set out in the complaint, at Ludington, Michigan, for the purchase of the propeller John O. Dewar for the sum of $6,500, and were to be equal owners and equal partners in it and in its business. John W. Zimmerman, by his son, the present administrator and respondent, paid down $600 on the purchase, and, within ten days thereafter, $400 more, according to the contract, and the appellant paid nothing. It had been previously understood and…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. James v. CutlerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
  2. Tallman v. BarnesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
  3. Miller v. PriceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
  4. Winslow v. CrowellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
  5. Edwards v. RemingtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Caveney v. CaveneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Momsen v. PlankintonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Slauson v. Goodrich Transportation Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Freund v. MurrayMontana Supreme Court · 1909
  5. Gray v. LordWisconsin Supreme Court · 1938

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

Powered by the Exa API