Burns v. Fox
Indiana Supreme Court
From the Newton Circuit Court.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, C. J.
The general rule is well settled, that before a party can enforce the specific performance of a contract to convey real estate, he must have made a demand for a conveyance, or a sufficient excuse must be alleged for not having made a demand, before bringing suit. Sheets v. Andrews, 2 Blackf. 274; Brown v. Jackson, 8 Blackf. 203; Mather v. Scoles, 35 Ind. 1; Reed v. Hodges, 80 Ind. 304; Harless v. Petty, 84 Ind. 269.
*206It is equally well settled that when one party has repudiated the contract, or refused performance, or has given notice to the other of his determination not to perform his part, a…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Wallace v. LongIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Phœnix Mutual Life Insurance v. HinesleyIndiana Supreme Court · 1881
- Hawley v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Bever v. NorthIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Mather v. ScolesIndiana Supreme Court · 1870
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Lowe v. TurpieIndiana Supreme Court · 1896
- New Castle Bridge Co. v. DotyIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
- Levy v. ChittendenIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Stanton v. KenrickIndiana Supreme Court · 1893
- Schoonover v. VachonIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.