Lowrie v. Gourlay
Michigan Supreme Court
Error to Wayne; Frazer, J. Assumpsit by Charles J. Lowrie. against James Gourlay and others for an alleged breach of a land contract. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error. The parties to this suit entered into a written contract December 6, 1889, by which the defendants agreed to sell to plaintiff certain parcels of land for $700,—$240 on delivery of the contract, and the remainder in three semiannual payments, with interest.
Read the full summary
Error to Wayne; Frazer, J. Assumpsit by Charles J. Lowrie. against James Gourlay and others for an alleged breach of a land contract. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error. The parties to this suit entered into a written contract December 6, 1889, by which the defendants agreed to sell to plaintiff certain parcels of land for $700,—$240 on delivery of the contract, and the remainder in three semiannual payments, with interest. It also provided that, upon failure of the plaintiff to perform the contract, the defendants might elect to consider it at an end, and in that event all…
1Opinion of the CourtGrant, J.
(after stating the facts). Plaintiff has no standing in a court of law. He neglected to pay and has never tendered the amount due. The court cannot make a contract for him. Defendants have never been in default. If he desires to be relieved from the legal effect of his default in making payments, a court of equity is the proper and only forum in which he can get relief. He entered that forum, and filed a bill under which he was entitled to specific performance. This was tendered him and declined. He is therefore estopped to maintain a suit at law.
Judgment reversed, and no new trial ordered.…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Satterlee v. CronkhiteMichigan Supreme Court · 1897
- Kreibich v. MartzMichigan Supreme Court · 1899