Manwill v. Oyler
Utah Supreme Court
361 P.2d 177 (1961)
Manwill (plaintiff) made payments totaling $5,506.20 on a farm occupied by Oyler (defendant) between 1950 and 1953. The payments were made on Oyler’s behalf. Additionally, in 1954, Manwill gave Oyler a grazing permit worth $1,800 and 18 head of cattle worth $3,000. In 1956, Manwill alleged that Oyler orally agreed to repay him for the previous sums conferred. Manwill brought suit in Utah state court seeking to enforce this oral promise. Oyler filed a motion to dismiss, and Manwill amended his complaint to state that Oyler orally agreed to repay him $5,506.20 in 1957. Oyler then filed an interlocutory appeal to the Utah Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Crockett, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 154,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,500 briefs, keyed to 184 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.