Moore v. Bare
Supreme Court of Iowa
Appeal from Pollc District Court. In the Spring of the year 1851 the defendant sold to plaintiff an interest in a patent right, styled “L. Brown’s Mammoth Self-feeding Lath Machine;” receiving in payment therefor six hundred dollars in cash, and the notes of plaintiff for the balance of the purchase money.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pollc District Court. In the Spring of the year 1851 the defendant sold to plaintiff an interest in a patent right, styled “L. Brown’s Mammoth Self-feeding Lath Machine;” receiving in payment therefor six hundred dollars in cash, and the notes of plaintiff for the balance of the purchase money. Upon the 23d day of October of the same year the parties agreed to change the original contract and a new one was entered into by which the defendant in consideration of certain covenants to- be performed by the plaintiff agreed upon his part to convey to said plaintiff on or before the…
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
The numerous errors assigned are -necessarily determined by the conclusion of the court upon two questions presented. Had the defendant, upon the day the contract was to be performed, such a title in the lot and patent right as would enable him to convey by the deeds ton dered, as he had agreed to? If not, was the plaintiff in such a position that he could declare the contract forfeited, and recover the money advanced ?
We will inquire first as to the condition of title in the lot agreed to be conveyed. It is conceded that the title thereto w7as fully in one C. C. Yan. That Yan and wife…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Hoge v. GeorgeWyoming Supreme Court · 1921
- Rodgers v. BurnettTennessee Supreme Court · 1901
- Allen v. PegramSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Swayne v. WaldoSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- Himmelberger v. Central State BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1927