Holliday v. Hubbard
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1962, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Kennedy v. Hasse (Minn. 1962)
- Dial Toaster Corp. v. Waters-Genter Co. (Minn. 1930)
- D'Arusment v. Jones (Tenn. 1880)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Action by the vendee to compel specific performance of a contract to convey real estate. The contract price was $8,800, $2,933 cash, of which $500 was paid at the date of the contract, and $2,934 was to be paid in one year, and $2,933 in two years, with interest at 8 per cent, per annum. The deed was to be delivered within 25 days after furnishing an abstract “upon receipt of balance of cash payments and the securities for deferred payments, herein stipulated.” That securities should be given for the deferred payments was clearly intended, but the contract does not specify or stipulate what they shall be. It is incomplete, wholly indefinite, in this particular. The court could not disregard the manifest intent that there shall be securities; it could not enforce a conveyance without requiring any security for the deferred payments; and it could not prescribe what securities shall be given, for to do so
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.