Halsell v. Renfrow
202 U.S. 287 (1906)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Halsell v. Renfrow, 202 U.S. 287 (1906)

Halsell v. Renfrow

No. 251

Submitted April 20, 1906

Decided May 14, 1906

202 U.S. 287

Syllabus

Where the court of first instance in a territory sees the witnesses, the full court deals with its findings as it would with the verdict of a jury, and does not go beyond questions of admissibility of evidence and whether there was any evidence to sustain the conclusion reached, and this Court goes no further unless in an unusual case.

A judgment for defendant in an action for specific performance based on a finding of fact, among others, that defendant has conveyed the property to an innocent purchaser for value cannot be reversed, as specific performance is impossible where the party to the contract has conveyed the property to one who is free from equities.

Under the Oklahoma statute in regard to conveyance of real estate, the contract, to be valid, must be in writing and subscribed by the parties thereto, and this is not met by a payment of a would-be purchaser to one claiming to he the agent of the owner but not authorized as such under the Oklahoma statute, nor in this case can such payment or a deposit of the deed in bank to be taken up under certain conditions be regarded as part performance on the part of the owner.

The facts are stated in the opinion.

Page 202 U. S. 291

Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.