Poland v. O'Connor
Nebraska Supreme Court
Tbis was a bill in chancery for a specific performance of a parol contract, for the sale of certain real estate. The plaintiff claimed to have made the purchase through one Clarke, who, as he insisted, was the defendant’s agent. Whether O’Connor had ever appointed Clarke his agent, or in any way authorized him to sell the lot, was a question of fact in the cause, much discussed.
Read the full summary
Tbis was a bill in chancery for a specific performance of a parol contract, for the sale of certain real estate. The plaintiff claimed to have made the purchase through one Clarke, who, as he insisted, was the defendant’s agent. Whether O’Connor had ever appointed Clarke his agent, or in any way authorized him to sell the lot, was a question of fact in the cause, much discussed. Clarke testified very positively that O’Connor had employed him to sell the lot, had assented to the sale and the terms of it, and. detailed a number of circumstances to show that he was correct. On the other hand,…
1Opinion of the Court
Crotjnse, J,
The bill was rightly dismissed.
The statute has said, that no person shall be charged with the execution of an agreement relating to the sale of land who has not personally, or by his agent signed a written agreement. — § 62, page 292, I?, S, And when done by an agent, that the authority of such agent must *53also be in writing. — § 84, page 297. The record shows no such case as should relieve the complainant from the operation of the statute.
1. The existence of a contract clear, definite and unequivocal in its terms should have been admitted by the answer, or satisfactorily…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Woodworth v. FranklinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Swales v. JacksonIndiana Supreme Court · 1890
- Riley v. HaworthIndiana Court of Appeals · 1902
- Mushrush v. ClevelandNebraska Supreme Court · 1886
- Hanlon v. WilsonNebraska Supreme Court · 1880
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.