Walker v. Radon

Idaho Supreme Court

Walker v. Radon

581 P.2d 808, 99 Idaho 350, 1978 Ida. LEXIS 425

CourtIdaho Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 18, 1978

DocketNo. 12283

StatusPublished

This text of 581 P.2d 808 (Walker v. Radon) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walker v. Radon, 581 P.2d 808, 99 Idaho 350, 1978 Ida. LEXIS 425 (Idaho 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from a judgment on a promissory note in favor of respondent which also denied appellants’ counterclaim for specific performance of an earnest money agreement. On appeal, appellants maintain that findings of fact by the district court are not supported by the evidence and that the district court erred in its conclusions of law. Appellants further contend that they are entitled to specific performance. The court has reviewed the record on appeal and concludes that the findings of fact made by the district court are supported by substantial and competent evidence and will, therefore, not be disturbed on appeal. Wisdom v. Henderson, 98 Idaho 45, 557 P.2d 1118 (1976); Pierson v. Sewell, 97 Idaho 38, 539 P.2d 590 (1975). Based on these findings of fact the district court did not err in its conclusions of law.

Judgment of the district court is affirmed. Costs to respondent.

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is from a judgment on a promissory note in favor of respondent which also denied appellants’ counterclaim for specific performance of an earnest money agreement. On appeal, appellants maintain that findings of fact by the district court are not supported by the evidence and that the district court erred in its conclusions of law. Appellants further contend that they are entitled to specific performance. The court has reviewed the record on appeal and concludes that the findings of fact made by the district court are supported by substantial and competent evidence and will, therefore, not be disturbed on appeal. Wisdom v. Henderson, 98 Idaho 45, 557 P.2d 1118 (1976); Pierson v. Sewell, 97 Idaho 38, 539 P.2d 590 (1975). Based on these findings of fact the district court did not err in its conclusions of law.

Judgment of the district court is affirmed. Costs to respondent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

581 P.2d 808, 99 Idaho 350, 1978 Ida. LEXIS 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walker-v-radon-idaho-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack