Legal Opinion

Moter v. Hershey

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 18, 1925No. File No. 5227PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSheravood, J.

This is an action for strict foreclosure of a contract to sell real estate brought under sections 2914-2917, *495R. C. 1919. Judgment of cancellation was entered, new trial denied, and defendant has appealed from both the judgment and order denying a new trial: No. brief was filed by or on behalf of respondent.

The contract, so far as necessary to an understanding of this case, provided in substance:

“On the performance of the agreement by the party of the second part,” George E. Moter, first party, would deed to John) Hershey, second party, by a good and sufficient deed, a half section of land in…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ink v. RohrigSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Keator v. FergusonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Speer v. PhillipsSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Hickman v. LongSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Hauert v. KaufmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Walsh v. BellamySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Heinzman v. HowardSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Hauert v. KaufmanSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Falde v. ChadwickSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Halvorson v. BirklandSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1969

6 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