Burke Land & Livestock Co. v. Wells, Fargo & Co.
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Bingham County. It is a well-settled rule that the courts, when called upon to construe contracts of parties and to interpret the language which they have employed to express their agreements, will, when there is any room for doubt, look to the circumstances which surrounded the parties at the time of entering into the agreement, and will read and construe the language employed by them in the light of these circumstances. (Nash v. Towne, 5 Wall.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from District Court, Bingham County. It is a well-settled rule that the courts, when called upon to construe contracts of parties and to interpret the language which they have employed to express their agreements, will, when there is any room for doubt, look to the circumstances which surrounded the parties at the time of entering into the agreement, and will read and construe the language employed by them in the light of these circumstances. (Nash v. Towne, 5 Wall. (TJ. S.) 689; Canal Co. v. Hill 15 Wall. (TJ. S.) 94; Merriam v. United States, 107 TJ. S. 437, 2 Sup. Ct. Bep. 536;…
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
The respondent, the Burke Land and Livestock Company, an Illinois corporation, hereinafter referred to as the “Illinois corporation/’ brought this action against Wells, Fargo & Co., a Colorado corporation doing business in the state of Utah, and the Burke Land and Cattle Company, a Utah corporation, hereinafter referred to as the “Utah corporation,” to redeem certain property, real and personal, from the mortgages described in the complaint, alleging that said mortgages had been fully paid and satisfied. The prayer of the complaint is as follows: “Wherefore plaintiff prays and demands that…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Railway Co. v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Nash v. TowneSupreme Court of the United States · 1867
- Merriam v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Canal Co. v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Walsh v. HillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Bethlahmy v. BechtelIdaho Supreme Court · 1966
- Anderson v. WhippleIdaho Supreme Court · 1951
- Dover Lumber Co. v. CaseIdaho Supreme Court · 1918
- Schlieff v. BistlineIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
- Meholin v. CarlsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1910
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.