Page:North Dakota Reports (vol. 1).pdf/355

, Appellant, v. , Respondent.

1. Contract; Public Park, Refusal of City to Accept.

K. and M, were the owners in severalty of certain lands within the corporate limits of the city of J. They entered into a contract with trustees, by which they agreed to furnish a fund which the trustees agreed to expend in improving certain land of M. for a city park and to have the improvements completed by January 1, 1885; K. and M. agreeing that upon the completion of the improvements, or at any time prior to January 1, 1886, when the city of J. would accept the same, they would dedicate certain land, including the land on which the improvements were made, to the city for a public park forever, on certain conditions. The city, by resolution, agreed to accept the land when improved as stated in the contract. The funds were raised, improvements made, and deeds of dedication placed in the hands of the trustees. The city refused to accept. After January 1, 1886, M. withdrew his deed, and conveyed to a third party. Held, that he violated no contractual relations with K. in so doing.

2. Specific Performance—Continuing Covenants.

Courts of equity will not decree specific performance of contracts containing continuous covenants, the enforcement of which might require the constant supervision of a court; nor will they enforce specific performance of contracts, every alleged violation of which would require the consideration and determination of questions of fact.

PPEAL from district court, Stutsman county; Hon., Judge.

Fredrus Baldwin and Paul & Merwin, for appellant, argued that the contract between the trustees and the parties to this action, together with the first resolution of the city council, constituted a dedication of land for public purposes: Dillon Mun. Cor. 764; Abbott v. Mills, 3 Vt. 526; Princeville v. Auten, 77 Ill. 325; Wheeler v. Bedford, 54 Conn. 244; Price v. Plainfield, 40 N. J. L. 608; Maywood Co. v. Maywood, 118 Ill. 61; Weeping Water v. Reed, 21 Neb. 261; Dillon 632, 642, Abbott v. Cottage City, 143 Mass. 521.

Edgar W. Camp, for respondent.

, J. In 1883 appellant and respondent were, respectively, owners of certain lands within the corporate, but