Legal Opinion

Benton v. Schulte

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 15, 1883PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the district court for Hennepin county, Lochren, J., presiding, sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.

1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.

This was an action to compel specific performance ■of a contract for the assignment of. a. lease of real estate for a term of years. Such a contract is clearly within the statute of frauds. Gen. St. 1878, c. 41, tit. 2, § 12. Briles v. Pace, 13 Ired. Law, 279. But it was not necessary to allege that it was in writing. The statute of frauds has not changed the rules of pleading. The writing is a matter of proof and not of allegation. In declaring on a contract which, though oral only, would have been valid at common law, it is sufficient to allege a contract generally, without stating whether…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Beckett-Iseman Oil Co. v. BackerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
  2. Pullen v. WrightSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1885
  3. Laybourn v. ZinnsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API