Dane & Northrop v. Rittiner

PONDER, Justice.

In this suit the plaintiff is seeking to recover from the defendant the sum of $4,088 alleged to be due under the terms of a contract entered into between the parties on July 17, 1952. The defense to the suit is to the effect that the contract is not binding because it was dependent upon a suspensive condition that did not occur. On trial the lower court gave judgment in favor of plaintiff for the amount claimed and the defendant has appealed.

It appears that the defendant, a building contractor, entered into negotiations with a Mr. Kelly with the view of securing FHA loans and…