Mathes v. Bell

Supreme Court of Iowa

Mathes v. Bell

96 N.W. 1093, 121 Iowa 722

DecidedOctober 30, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 96 N.W. 1093 (Mathes v. Bell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mathes v. Bell, 96 N.W. 1093, 121 Iowa 722 (iowa 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

JPer Ouriam.

There are several reasons, as we think, why the judgment cannot be upheld. It. will be sufficient to say that, in our judgment, a contract to sell and convey real estate is not made out. Olearly, Grew was acting in the premises as the agent of Mathes, and was seeking to make a purchase for his client. Now, the letter written by Bell cannot be construed into a contract to sell and convey, and therefore there was no agreement in writing on his part, as required by the statute of frauds. Code, section 4625. And the deposit of the money in a bank by plaintiff and his agent cannot have the effect to take the case out of the statute. Such was done without any agreement on the part of the defendant, and without his knowledge. Moreover, we do not see how there could be any right of action in any event, until it was ascertained to a certainty what was the number of acres of land, and there was an offer to pay for the actual acreage at the price alleged. — Reversed.

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

JPer Ouriam.

There are several reasons, as we think, why the judgment cannot be upheld. It. will be sufficient to say that, in our judgment, a contract to sell and convey real estate is not made out. Olearly, Grew was acting in the premises as the agent of Mathes, and was seeking to make a purchase for his client. Now, the letter written by Bell cannot be construed into a contract to sell and convey, and therefore there was no agreement in writing on his part, as required by the statute of frauds. Code, section 4625. And the deposit of the money in a bank by plaintiff and his agent cannot have the effect to take the case out of the statute. Such was done without any agreement on the part of the defendant, and without his knowledge. Moreover, we do not see how there could be any right of action in any event, until it was ascertained to a certainty what was the number of acres of land, and there was an offer to pay for the actual acreage at the price alleged. — Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 N.W. 1093, 121 Iowa 722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mathes-v-bell-iowa-1903.