Legal Opinion

Chamberlin v. Ivens

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided November 1, 1922PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLee, J.

This is an action to recover money paid by respondent to appellant upon the purchase price of lands in a Carey entry, and for an additional amount thereafter paid *239•by him to the construction company upon the purchase price, of the water right appurtenant thereto. The complaint sets out the conditional agreement haec verba, and respondent relies for recovery upon the following provision therein:

“That in the event the said vendor fails within one year to secure a patent to said land, then he shall refund back to vendee all money paid him, together with interest thereon at the rate of seven per…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Conner v. HendersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1818
  2. Reddish v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Swann v. Sweetwater Irrigation & Power Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
  4. Bates v. Capital State BankIdaho Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Duncan v. JeterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1843

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Miller v. Mutual Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
  2. Eldridge v. Idaho State PenitentiaryIdaho Supreme Court · 1934
  3. Roddy v. StateIdaho Supreme Court · 1943
  4. Richards v. JarvisIdaho Supreme Court · 1925
  5. Wetterow v. WhiteIdaho Supreme Court · 1951

1 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