Proudfoot v. Wightman

Citations

• 78 Ill. 553

Syllabus

<p>1. Agency—proof of parol authority to sell land. While it may be true, that parol authority may be sufficient to constitute an agency for the sale of real estate, yet if a purchaser relies upon such authority, and seeks to enforce the contract, the proof to establish the power of the agent must be clear, certain and specific. A bare preponderance of the evidence will not be sufficient.</p> <p>3. Degree of proof. In an ordinary chancery case, the complainant must establish the material allegations of his bill by a preponderance of the evidence; but on bill for the specific performance of a contract for the sale of land made by an agent under a parol authority, the burden of proof is thrown upon the complainant to establish the power by something more than a bare preponderance of evidence.</p> <p>8. Specific performance—refused for unfairness. Where an application is made to a court of equity to decree the specific performance of a contract, if it appears the contract is unfair, unjust, or dishonest, the court will not lend its aid to compel its performance.'</p> <p>4 Same—fraudulent conduct of agent. If an agent authorized to sell land at a given price, three years after, when the value has greatly advanced and is rapidly rising, sells the same at the price named, and at a great sacrifice, without informing his principal of the rise in value, this will he such a fraud upon the principal, as that a court of equity may refuse to enforce a conveyance to the purchaser.</p>