Legal Opinion · Dissent

R.H. Pierce Manufacturing Corp. v. Continental Manufacturing Co.

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided March 28, 1984No. 13493Published

1DissentBakes, Justice

I disagree with the majority opinion’s characterization of the issue presented here. In order to see the issue clearly, it is necessary to look more closely at the factual situation presented.

Prior to the events outlined herein, Lott Enterprises (Lott) was the owner of a parcel of real property described as follows:

“Lot 4, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; Lot 3, Block 4, of the Midway Subdivision in the County of Minidoka, State of Idaho, as the same is platted in the official plat now of record in the office of the county recorder of the County of Minidoka, State of Idaho.”

In 1974, Lott entered into…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Estate of Maguire v. McNuttSupreme Court of Kansas · 1970
  2. Master Builders, Inc. v. CabbellNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. Onyx Refining Co. v. Evans Production Corp.District Court, N.D. Texas · 1959
  4. Gurunian v. GrossmanMichigan Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Pratt v. ProutySupreme Court of Iowa · 1898

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

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

Powered by the Exa API