McAllister v. City of Riesel
This text of 146 F.2d 130 (McAllister v. City of Riesel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The complaint as amended does not allege the performance of the conditions precedent to Plaintiff’s right to recover; nor does it allege that such performance was wrongfully prevented by the City; nor that the period from September 2, 1935, until July 15, 1938, was not a reasonable time within which to perform the conditions precedent; nor was the performance of the conditions precedent in any wise alleged or excused.
Any right in the Plaintiff to receive compensation was contingent under the contract, and the contract was so vague and indefinite as not to be enforcible against the City.
The order of the lower Court in dismissing the complaint is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
146 F.2d 130, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 2257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcallister-v-city-of-riesel-ca5-1944.