American Law Book Co. v. Later

256 P. 371, 44 Idaho 290, 1927 Ida. LEXIS 87
Idaho Supreme Court·Decided May 14, 1927·No. No. 4666.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*292 GIVENS, J.

Upon breach, by the purchaser, of a title-retaining contract of sale providing for instalment payments, prefaced by the agreement: “which I agree to take and to pay for as follows:” with the further agreement in case of default to return the property, the seller has two remedies; the collection of the remainder of the purchase price, or, second, the retaking of the property. (Pease v. Teller Corp., 22 Ida. 807, 128 Pac. 981; Thienes v. Francis, 69 Or. 171, 134 Pac. 1195, 138 Pac. 845; Manganese Steel Safe Co. v. First Nat. Bank, 25 S. D. 119, 125 N. W. 572; Sioux Falls Adjustment Co. v. Aikens, 32 S. D. 154, 142 N. W. 651; Mortensen Woodworking Co. v. Raabe, 171 N. Y. Supp. 128. See, also, Arthur E. Guth Piano Co. v. Adams, 114 Me. 390, 96 Atl. 722.) The appellant plead and made a prima facie case undér the first alternative remedy and the trial court therefore erroneously entered a nonsuit in favor of the purchaser.

The judgment is ordered reversed and the cause remanded. Costs awarded to appellant.

Taylor and T. Bailey Lee, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

American Law Book Co. v. Later, 256 P. 371, 44 Idaho 290, 1927 Ida. LEXIS 87 (Idaho 1927).

256 P. 371 (American Law Book Co. v. Later) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Shipman v. Kloppenburg
240 P.2d 1151 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1952)