Lord v. Miller

Citations

• 86 Wash. 436
• 150 P. 631
• 1915 Wash. LEXIS 1013

Syllabus

<p>Sales — Option—Acceptance—Action Upon. Where an option to purchase machinery was acted upon by the purchasers, who took possession, dismantled and removed it from its previous location, changing its condition and status and destroying the identity of some of it, the option was accepted and the vendor could enforce payment of the agreed purchase price.</p> <p>Pleading — Matters in Evidence — Affirmative Answer- — Necessity. In an action for breach of defendant’s contract to furnish the money for a joint venture in purchasing and reselling certain property, the defendant, upon admitting the contract and denying its breach, is not entitled to show, as excuses for nonpayment, that the payment was not to be made until delivery of the property at Seattle, that such delivery could not be made within the time allowed by reason of failure of transportation, and that the title to the property was defective by reason of liens against it; since they were special matters in defense, to be affirmatively pleaded.</p> <p>Contracts — Rescission—Grounds — Claim of Defect in Title. Rescission of an agreement to furnish the money to purchase certain property is not warranted by the fact that certain bondholders had threatened to establish liens or title of some kind to the property, in the absence of evidence of any actual defect or bona fide claim sufficient to dispossess the purchaser, or at least to have had some substance and color in law or equity.</p>