Casey v. Diehl

Supreme Court of Kansas
Casey v. Diehl, 84 Kan. 443 (Kan. 1911)
113 P. 1046; 1911 Kan. LEXIS 346

Casey v. Diehl

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

No cause of action for the loss of his bargain accrued to the plaintiff, because the contract was not binding under the statute of frauds. (Leis v. Potter, 68 Kan. 117, 121.)

The other item of damage claimed is not recoverable -on the principle of estoppel, because the claim arises upon voluntary conduct of the plaintiff, not induced by the defendant, and entirely outside the purview of the contract.

The judgment is affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
E. G. Casey v. Mrs. S. M. Diehl
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published
Syllabus
HEADNOTE BY THE REPORTER. Damages — Contract—Statute of Frauds. Damages for loss of profits on a contract denied because the agreement was not binding under the statute of frauds.