Spiess v. Brandt
Minnesota Supreme Court
41 N.W.2d 561, 230 Minn. 246 (1950)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Lowell and Maurice Spiess (plaintiffs) agreed to buy Jameson’s Wilderness Resort from William and John Carlos Brandt (defendants) for $95,000. The Spiesses made an initial offer of $90,000 after their first conversation with the Brandts, during which William Brandt had indicated his expectation that the future prospects of the resort were good. During subsequent negotiations, the Brandts asked for $100,000 for the resort. The Spiesses asked how long it would take them to recoup that money and the Brandts responded that it would take about five years. The Brandts also stated that they made “good money” owning the resort. In actuality, the Brandts lost money each year they operated the resort. The parties eventually settled upon the sale price of $95,000. About six months after the purchase, the Spiesses brought suit for rescission of the contract on account of the Brandts’ fraudulent misrepresentation regarding the resort’s profitability. The trial court ruled in favor of the Spiesses and rescinded the contract. The Brandts appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Matson, J.)
Dissent (Peterson, J.)
Dissent (Gallagher, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
