Brueggeman v. Jurgensen

• Decision Date: 31 October 1856
• Parties: BRUEGGEMAN et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. JURGENSEN, Defendant in Error.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

24 Mo. 87

BRUEGGEMAN et al., Plaintiffs in Error,

v.JURGENSEN, Defendant in Error.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1856.

1. There is no equity for specific performance of a contract to convey land where the party against whom such equity is asserted has rendered a specific execution on his part impossible by conveying said land to a third person.

2. The heirs of an intestate cannot be joined as parties plaintiff with the administrator in a suit for the recovery of damages for the breach of a contract to convey land to such intestate.

Error to St. Louis Land Court.

Plaintiffs, the administrator and heirs of one Brueggeman, deceased, set forth in their petition a contract entered into by defendant to convey certain real estate to plaintiffs' intestate. The prayer of the petition is as follows: “Plaintiffs therefore ask judgment for the specific performance of defendant's agreement, and that he be compelled and decreed to make a reconveyance to the legal representatives of said Gerhard H. [plaintiffs' intestate] of the property above described.” It appeared in evidence that the defendant had made a conveyance of the real estate in question to one Stahl.

The court instructed the jury that plaintiffs were not entitled to recover.

The following instructions, asked by the plaintiffs, were refused by the court: “1. The jury are instructed that to find for the defendant because he has sold the property, the jury must believe from the evidence that the deed of Jurgensen and wife to Christian Stahl was a bona fide sale of the property, and made for a valuable consideration. 2. The jury are instructed that the deed of Jurgensen and wife to Christian Stahl is of no value, unless the jury believe from the evidence that it was made bona fide and for a valuable consideration. 3. The jury are instructed, that if the jury believe from the evidence that defendant covenanted to convey to Gerhard H. Brueggeman the property in dispute; that said Gerhard H. Brueggeman is intestate, and plaintiffs his heirs; that the conditions of the covenants to reconvey have been complied with by the plaintiffs; that defendant, by a sale of the property of Christian Stahl, before the institution of this suit, has put it out of his power to comply with his covenant to reconvey, the jury will find for the plaintiffs such damages as the jury believe from the evidence the plaintiffs have sustained by the failure of defendant to comply with his bond.”

A. J. & P. B. Garesché, for plaintiffs in error.

Krum & Harding, for defendant in error.

SCOTT, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This case stands on a non-suit, and we see no way in which the plaintiffs can be relieved from it. If we regard the suit as one to enforce the specific performance of a contract to convey lands,...