Wolcott v. Booth
This text of 609 P.2d 156 (Wolcott v. Booth) 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.
Opinions
Plaintiffs-appellants Wolcotts entered into an earnest money agreement with defendants-respondents Booth which related to the purchase and sale of real property. Thereafter, the Wolcotts brought this action for specific performance. Attached to [90]*90plaintiffs’ complaint and relied upon in plaintiffs’ complaint was the earnest money agreement, a printed form bearing an Idaho Association of Realtors imprint and prepared by a real estate broker. Upon defendants’ motion, the district court dismissed the Wolcotts’ action because their complaint failed to state a claim for relief. Matheson v. Harris, 96 Idaho 759, 536 P.2d 754 (1975); Luke v. Conrad, 96 Idaho 221, 526 P.2d 181 (1974).
We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district court did not err. Costs to respondents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
609 P.2d 156, 101 Idaho 89, 1980 Ida. LEXIS 432, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolcott-v-booth-idaho-1980.