Legal Opinion
Romans v. Langevin
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided December 4, 1885PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Ramsey county, Simons, J., presiding, overruling a demurrer to the complaint in an action for specific performance.
1Opinion of the CourtBerry, J.
The complaint alleges that on December 2, 1884, the defendant, by his agent, “made and entered into” the following agreement, viz. :
“Received of Wilson J. Romans one hundred dollars, as earnest-money and part purchase price of lot one, block ten, of Bazille and Roberts’ addition to West St. Raul, being fifty feet front on Ducas street by sixty-nine feet on Fairfield avenue, which I have sold for the sum of eighteen hundred dollars, on the following terms: Assume a mortgage of $600 now on said lot, and pay the balance in cash. Abstract of title to be furnished. If title is not perfect, money…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hurley v. BrownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Quinnin v. ReimersMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Fowler v. RedicanIllinois Supreme Court · 1869
3Cited by2 opinions
- McMahon v. PlumbSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
- Quinn v. ChampagneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888