St. Paul daily globe., 1893-05-20

cover damages because Of the failure
and inability of defendant TO convey
good title in accordance with the cOndl-
tions of his bond. In this instrument it
was stated that the premises to be coll
veyed we're the same decided by one
Porter and his wife to Joseph Nadeau
in 1874 and by said Nadeau and his wife
to defendant in April, 1876. At the date
of conveyance to defendant Nadeau
was married man, as defend
ant we'll knew; but his wife
at that time refused, and
she has ever since refused to join in the
deed or to consent in writing to the
same. BY reason of this refusal, de-
fendant's title to the premises was and
has remained defective, subject to the
inchoate interest and estate Of Nadeau's
wife, known as the dover right. In
1882 the plaintiff, desiring to make sub
stantial improvements on the land. Of
fered to pay the balance of the pur
chase price to defendant, pro-
viding he would convey good
title to her, but, discovering the
defect mentioned, she refused to
accept bis deed, solely because of this
defect. Defendant assured her that he
would secure the conveyance desired,
and that she could safely make the pro-
posed improvements. At this time the
balance of the purchase was not due,
although she could pay it at her option.
Relying upon these representations and
assurances, plaintiff made the improve
ments alluded to. She had also paid
the interest upon the deferred purchase
price, and the taxes upon the property,
as they fell due, for several years.
The defendant has failed to perfect
the title, and the supreme court says
that when ordering judgment for
plaintiff the court below recognized her
right to recover the amount paid as part
of the purchase price, with interest
upon the deferred payment, and to re-
cover the amounts paid for taxes. AS
against this it Offsets the rental value of
the premises while in plaintiffs posses
sion. No interest was allowed her on
the deferred payments, nor upon the
sums annually paid as taxes, nor was
interest allowed TO defendant upon the
ar. cunts determined to be due him as
iLrual rental, nor was anything
awarded to plaintiff as compensation
for the Improvements upon the prop
erty. The court remanded the case for
n new trial, and Justice Collins sylla-
bus reads:
l. LII an action by vendee for
breach of contract TO sell real property
because of the inability of the vendor to
convey good title, the former is entitled
to recover of the vendor interest upon
all moneys paid on the contract from
the date Of payment, whether the same
was paid as principal or interest. And
is also entitled to recover such sums as
he may have paid as taxes upon the
premises, with interest from the dates
Of payment.
2. The general rule in such cases is
that the vendee may also recover the
value of improvements put Oh the land
by him in good faith in so far as such
improvements may at the time Of the
rescssion of the contract permanently
enhance the value of the same.
3. AS against these items OF damage,
the vendor is entitled to offset the rental
value of the premises, to be estimated
without the improvements placed there
on by the Vendee.
Special Laws Void.
State of Minnesota ex rel. Ira P. Shissler, re-
lator, VS.. Jerome E. Porter, respondent.
Order to show cause discharged.
COLLINS, j.
Syllabus-In so far as they relate to
the term of office of the Judge of the
municipal court for the city of Mankato,
State Laws 1857, chapter S; S. l.. 1859,
| ch. l, aud S. l.. 1891, ch. AZ. are uncOn-
| Sttutonal and void. The subject of the
| attempted legislation is not expressed
in the titles to these laws, as required
| by sec. q, art. Of the constitution.
Age OF Discretion.
Ruby D. Temple, appellant, vs. MaryL Nor
ris respondent Order affirmed.
COLLINS, J.
Syllabus-A person who has attained
| the age of fourteen is at years of legal
| discretion. and prima face is a person
| of suitable age and discretion within
| the meaning of General Statutes 1878,
| chapter 66, section 80, sub. 81, reguiat-
ing the manner of the service of a sum
| mons in civil action.
| A Technically Merely.
Mary B. Lee. respondent VS.. Matt Clark. ap-
| pellant. Order affirmed. COLLINS, j.
Syllabus-The original summons in
an action was duly subscribed by plaint-
ifs attorneys, and their place of busi-
ness was stated with unnecessary par
ticularity. 1t was also indorsed upon
the back in the same way. Attached to
the summons was the complaint, duly
signed by plaintiffs attorneys. Copies
of the summons and of the complaint
were served together upon defendant,
accurate :and complete in every respect,
except that the firm name of the plant
ifs attorneys was omitted when tran
scrlbing the subscription to the sum-
mons. Held mere irregularity, and
that if defendant desired to take ad.
| vantage Of it he should have done so by
| a motion to set aside the service.
A Trade Deal.
| Henry W. Merchant et al, copartners as
| Merchant d Co., appellants, VS.. Robert r.
| Howell et al, copartners as Il. r. Howell
| & Co., respondents. Order affirmed.
| COLLINS, j.
Syllabus-Defendants ordered from
plaintiffs 1900 2-inch boiler fiues, fer
rules, 1.5O0 214-inch and 1900 3-inch;
this is outside diameter
| Held that it was competent to show,
| for the purpose of explaining the mean
ing of the order, that in the trade in
which both parties were engaged boiler
| fue ferrules are standard articles of
| common use, and that it was the general
| custom to designate them by the size of
| the flues on which they are to be used.
Also. that boiler hues are always
| manufactured in certain regular and
standard sizes of exact outside diane
| ters, and that if the dimensions named