Legal Opinion

H.T. C. Co. v. Whitehouse

Utah Supreme Court

Decided January 3, 1916No. 2746PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

APPELLANTS' POINTS.

If a contract is to be rescinded by either party it must be done in its entirety, and cannot be done in part. In this case the plaintiffs affirm the contract as to the 360 acres of land to which the title they say is good, but rescind as to the balance. (Cole v. Smith, 58 Pae. 1086, 26 Colo. 506; 11 Century Digest [Contracts], Sec. 1194.) If recovery is to be had upon this warranty the basis of recovery should be the value of the part lost in reference to the value of entire tract. (Haynes v.Packard, 45 S.W. 562; Phillips v. Pickert, 79 Am. Dec. 463;Hoffman v. Kirby, 68…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hynes v. PackardTexas Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Mygatt v. . CoeNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  3. Mygatt v. . CoeNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
  4. Le Vine v. WhitehouseUtah Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Carter v. BeckSupreme Court of Alabama · 1867

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Flying Diamond Oil Corp. v. Newton Sheep Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1989

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

Powered by the Exa API