Thieme v. Worst
Idaho Court of Appeals
745 P.2d 1076 (1987)
Richard and Rebecca Worst (defendants) acquired land with water shares but, unaware a neighbor had never actually used the associated irrigation water, listed the land for sale believing water could be delivered via an existing culvert and ditch. Norris and Katherine Thieme (plaintiffs) viewed the culvert and ditch and likewise assumed water could be irrigated, purchasing the parcel and water shares; only after the sale did both sides discover a cement barrier -- unknown to either party -- blocking water delivery into the ditch. The Thiemes sued for rescission; the trial court found a mutual mistake and, instead of rescission, ordered the Worsts to arrange for water delivery and, when they hadn't, found breach and ordered specific performance rather than rescission. The Thiemes appealed the remedy, and the Worsts cross-appealed the finding of mutual mistake.
Whether, upon a finding of mutual mistake, an equity court has the power to modify an agreement as justice requires.