Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Mitchill (P), wanted to buy property from Lath (D). Across the road, on property belonging to another, D had an icehouse, which they might remove. P found the icehouse objectionable and wanted it removed. D had made an oral agreement with P that D would remove the icehouse on the adjoining property. Relying on this promise, P bought the property. The written contract was completely integrated. P moved onto the property and got her deed and spent considerable sums improving the property for a summer residence. D refused to remove the icehouse that next spring as promised. P sued to compel removal under specific performance. Judgment was entered for P. The appellate court affirmed. D appealed.
Holding and Decision
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Legal Analysis
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.
© 2024 Casebriefsco.com. All Rights Reserved.