Focke v. Havel

Citations

• 110 Kan. 690
• 205 P. 349
• 1922 Kan. LEXIS 126

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COUET.</p> <p>1. Specific Performance — Sale of Land — Evidence Proved Soundness of Mind of Vendor. There was evidence which tended to prove that the appellant was of sound mind at the time she contracted for the sale of real property.</p> <p>2. Same. There was evidence to support the jury’s answers to the special questions.</p> <p>3. Same — Sale of Land — Instructions as to Soundness of Mind of Vendor. An instruction which stated “insanity can only be proved by clear and reasonable evidence” but which also stated that “before you find the defendant of unsound mind you should believe such fact established by a preponderance of the evidence,” was not so misleading as to compel a reversal of the judgment based thereon.</p> <p>4. Same — Evidence That Contract Was Signed During a Luoid Interval of Vendor. There was evidence which tended to prove that the contract for the sale of real property was signed during a lucid interval of the one resisting’ the specific performance of the contract on the ground of unsoundness of mind at the time the contract was made.</p> <p>5. Same — Contract Not Inequitable. There was nothing inequitable in compelling the specific performance of the contract in question.</p>