Legal Opinion · Dissent
Kimball v. Statler
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided December 21, 1918No. Civil No. 1582Published
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the county of Cochise. A. C. Lockwood, Judge.
1DissentCunningham, C. J.
(Dissenting). — The consideration supporting the contract of exchange of lands, that is, a promise for a promise, is, without any doubt, a good consideration, such as will support the contract. The question here presented is whether such consideration will, in equity, create such a contract as will be specifically enforced.
Contracts, to be specifically enforced, must be supported by valuable consideration; a good consideration is not sufficient. Winter v. Goebner, 2 Colo. App. 259, 30 Pac. 51, affirmed, 21 Colo. 279, 40 Pac. 570; 3 Pomeroy’s Equity Jurisprudence, § 1405; Shepherd v. Shepherd,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Butman v. PorterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Vasser v. VasserMississippi Supreme Court · 1852
- Winter v. GoebnerColorado Court of Appeals · 1892
- Winter v. GeobnerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1895
- Shepherd v. ShepherdHigh Court of Chancery of Maryland · 1848