Legal Opinion

Coles v. Shepard

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 8, 1883PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Washington county, Crosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. The case is stated in the opinion. \ The contract of which specific performance is sought in this action is one of which time is the essence. The parties had a right to make it. The contract, having been broken, should not be enforced. A court of equity has no right to interfere to.make a new contract which the parties have not made.

Read the full summary

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Washington county, Crosby, J., presiding, refusing a new trial. The case is stated in the opinion. \ The contract of which specific performance is sought in this action is one of which time is the essence. The parties had a right to make it. The contract, having been broken, should not be enforced. A court of equity has no right to interfere to.make a new contract which the parties have not made. Taylor v. Longworth, 14 Pet. 172. Green v. Covillaud, 10 Cal. 317; Grey v. Tubbs, 43 Cal. 359; Potter v. Tut-tle, 22 Conn. 512; Smith v.…

1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.

This is an action to enforce specific performance of a sealed contract to convey certain land, executed by Mrs. Anderson, owner of the land, (her husband subscribing in token of his assent,) to the plaintiff. The purchase price was to be paid in 14 instalments of $30 each; the first, July 23, 1879, and one every three months thereafter (without interest) till the whole was paid. The contract provided that “upon the just and full payment of said sum (i. e., the price) at the times above stated, time being made the essence of this contract, the party of the first part will, at her own expense,…

2Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. DennisOregon Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Forssell v. CarterSupreme Court of Florida · 1913
  3. O'Connor v. HughesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
  4. State v. RobySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  5. Block v. SmithSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1895

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API