Skip to main content
· 10/6/1902

Washington Irr. Co. v. Krutz

Citations

  • 119 F. 279
  • 56 C.C.A. 1
  • 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4666

Syllabus

<p>1. Contracts—Illegality of Consideration—Services. Rendered by Public Officer.</p> <p>The officers of an irrigation company offered to convey 160 acres of land to the register of a land office in consideration of services rendered by him in the company’s behalf with respect to certain lands in dispute before the department. He declined the offer, stating that he could not accept it while an officer, but would do so after his term expired, provided the company would give him some work to do in payment. After the expiration of his term, he rendered nominal services to the company, upon which the offer was renewed and accepted. Held, that the latter transaction was so blended with the former and the conditional acceptance of the first offer as to constitute a single transaction, and to render the agreement void and unenforceable in the courts, as against public policy.</p> <p>2. Same—New Consideration.</p> <p>Complainant contracted with the officers of an Irrigation company for water rights for a half section of land, in payment for which he was to convey a half section to the company; being credited thereon, however, with a quarter section which such officers had previously agreed to convey to him for an illegal consideration. He purchased the remaining quarter section, and caused the same .to be conveyed to the company, by which it was accepted and retained. Held, that such conveyance and acceptance constituted a new and sufficient consideration for the contract, which rendered it valid and enforceable, notwithstanding the illegality of the prior agreement.</p> <p>8. Corporations—Ratification of Unauthorized Contract.</p> <p>The acceptance and retention by the irrigation company of the land conveyed to it by complainant, with knowledge of the contract under which the conveyance was made, was a ratification of such contract, even if it was originally made by its officers without authority.</p> <p>4. Specific Performance—Discretion of Court.</p> <p>Specific performa

Judges: Hawley

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.