Merritt v. Dufur

• Decision Date: 15 October 1896
• Citation: 99 Iowa 211,68 N.W. 553
• Parties: MERRITT v. DUFUR ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

99 Iowa 211

68 N.W. 553

MERRITT

v.DUFUR ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 15, 1896.

Appeal from district court, Union county; H. M. Towner, Judge.

Action in equity for the cancellation of a lease of real estate, and of a note given for rent, and to enjoin the enforcement of the lease and note. There was a hearing on the merits, and a judgment for the defendants. The plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Jas. A. Merritt, for appellant.

Jas. G. Bull and Hugh M. Fry, for appellees.

ROBINSON, J.

On the 3d day of February, 1893, the plaintiff leased 160 acres of land in Union county for the term of one year from the 1st day of the next March, and for rent paid $100 in money, and gave his two promissory notes for the sum of $150 each, of which one was payable on the 1st day of the next October, and the other on the 1st day of the next January. A lease in writing was drawn in the name of the defendant S. J. Dufur as lessor, but was signed only by the plaintiff. It purported to lease the N. 1/2 of the N. W. 1/4 of section 14, the N. E. 1/4 of the N. E. 1/4 of section 15, and the S. E. 1/4 of the S. E. 1/4 of section 10, all in township 72 N., of range 28 W. The two tracts first described were in fact owned by S. J. Dufur, but the tract in section 10 was owned by the defendant E. T. Dufur. The contract of lease was made on the part of the landowners by the defendant J. M. Jackson. The plaintiff had not known anything of the land, but it was shown to him by Jackson before the lease was made. He claims that the weather was cold and stormy, and the ground covered with snow, at the time, and that he was unable to determine for himself the real character of the land; that, to induce him to take a lease, Jackson told him that he and E. T. Dufur were the agents for Mrs. Dufur, who was the owner of all the land, and that the lowest price for which she would rent it for the term desired was $400; that it was all of good, rich soil, and tillable; that all of a certain meadow could be plowed and planted to corn, and that it was excellent land, well adapted to raising corn; that an orchard on the farm bore 100 bushels of apples; that, in the pasture which included the tract in section 10, there was a never-failing spring, which always furnished an ample supply of water for stock; and that the farm was cheap at the rent stated. The plaintiff further claims that he believed and relied upon the representations of Jackson in taking the lease, but discovered after he had moved onto the farm that the soil was poor and stony; that it was not all good, tillable land, but that only about one-half...