Shaeffer v. Blair

This was a suit in equity by John I. Blair against Samuel C. Shaeffer for specific performance of a contract. There was a decree for plaintiff in the court below, (33 Fed. Rep. 218,) and defendant appeals. Reversed.

Statement by Mr. Justice GRAY:

This was a bill in equity, filed December 8, 1885, by John I. Blair, a citizen of New Jersey, against Samuel C. Shaeffer, a citizen of Ohio, and other persons, citizens of other states, claiming under him, setting forth a contract in writing between the plaintiff and Shaeffer, dated February 4, 1884, (which is copied in the margin,) and praying that Shaeffer might be ordered to convey to the plaintiff the lands described in that contract, and that it be adjudged that the defendants had no title or interest therein, and for further relief.

At the hearing in the circuit court, upon pleadings and proofs, the case appeared to be in substance as follows: In February, 1884, Shaeffer obtained and received from the plaintiff sums of money amounting to $92,882.70, upon fraudulent representations that they were needed to pay for the lands described in the contract; and, within a month after its date, procured conveyances of those lands to himself, by paying therefor sums amounting to $59,789.30 only, and paid $500 for taxes and other necessary expenses, leaving the sum of $32,593.40 due to the plaintiff; and afterwards refused, on demand, to convey the lands to the plaintiff.

The three tracts of land described in the contract contained respectively about 36 1/2 acres, about 138 acres, and 69 acres, near Kansas City, in the state of Missouri, and were worth more at the time of the contract than the sums paid by the plaintiff, and greatly increased in value afterwards.

In an action at law against Shaeffer, submitted to the circuit court without a jury at the same time with the present suit in equity, the plaintiff recovered judgment for the aforesaid sum of $32,593.40. Upon that judgment no writ of error was sued out.

In the present suit the circuit court held that the contract sued on created no partnership between the plaintiff and Shaeffer, and conferred on Shaeffer only the right of an agent to sell, with a share in the profits by way of compensation; and that Shaeffer, by his fraudulent conduct, had forfeited all his rights under the contract, including not only the 5 per cent. commission on sales, but the share of 40 per cent. in the net profits remaining after payment of the sums advanced by the plaintiff; and entered a decree for the plaintiff as prayed for. 33 Fed. Rep. 218. From this decree Shaeffer appealed to this court.

Richard A. Harrison and C. D. Martin, for appellant.

Chas. O. Tichenor, for appellee.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 252-255 intentionally omitted]

Mr. Justice GRAY, after stating the case, delivered the opinion of the court.