The plaintiff entered into an oral contract with the defendant to purchase a farm land for $30,500, with possession to be given in January 1974. The plaintiff fulfilled their obligations, but the defendant backed out of the agreement. The plaintiff filed an action for specific performance, but the trial court granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment based on the statute of frauds. The plaintiff appealed, and the case is now before the Kansas Supreme Court. The most relevant facts are whether the equitable considerations require the trial court to remove the statute of frauds as a defense to the action for specific performance of the oral contract.

Walker v. Ireton (1977)
Kansas Supreme Court
221 Kan. 314, 559 P.2d 340

Learn more about this case at [ Ссылка ]

---

Law School Data has over 50,000 case briefs and a one-of-a-kind brief tool to instantly brief millions of US cases with just the name or case cite.

Check out all of our case briefs: [ Ссылка ]

Briefs come with built in LSDefine and DeepDive, which allow you to read as quickly or as deeply as you want. Each brief has a built in legal dictionary and recursive summaries that go into more and more detail, until you eventually hit the original case text.

Subscribe for new videos every week: [ Ссылка ]

свернуть