A buyer agreed to purchase a portion of a seller’s parcel fo…
A buyer agreed to purchase a portion of a seller’s parcel for $25,000. The buyer and the seller orally agreed that the property included in the purchase would be the westerly third of the parcel, and the eastern boundary would be a stone fence that ran from the northern border of the parcel to the southern boundary. Due to a clerical error by the seller’s secretary, when the agreement was reduced to writing, the eastern boundary was stated to be the picket fence, which is 275 yards east of the stone fence. If the buyer sues for specific performance of the contract conveying the additional strip of land, will the buyer likely prevail? Responses
Read DetailsBrea placed the following ad in her local newspaper: “House…
Brea placed the following ad in her local newspaper: “House located at 744 Leaf Ave. for sale at $250,000.” Lee read the ad, visited the property, and talked with Brea. Lee and Brea orally agreed that Lee would purchase the home for $215,000 and title would transfer to him within 90 days. Lee gave Brea a check for $25,000 as an earnest money deposit. Lee signed the check, writing “$215,000 purchase price for 744 Leaf Ave.” on the back of the check and Brea’s name on the payee line. Brea has not cashed the check. Which of the following is correct in most jurisdictions?
Read DetailsWells Corporation decided to purchase a new office building…
Wells Corporation decided to purchase a new office building from Manu Partnership. Wells and Manu signed a purchase and sales contract, whereby Manu agreed to transfer title within two months for a purchase price of $5,000,000. During the executory period, the property was substantially damaged by fire. Neither Wells nor Manu caused the fire. The loss in value was estimated to be $3,000,000. Manu had continued its casualty insurance on the property and insurance proceeds of $3,000,000 are now available. Under the traditional doctrine of equitable conversion, which of the following is correct?
Read DetailsA seller put her house and lot on the market for $200,000. A…
A seller put her house and lot on the market for $200,000. After receiving several offers within $5,000 of her asking price, the seller entered into a contract to sell the house and lot to a buyer for $200,000. The contract provided that the buyer put up $4,000 in earnest money, which the seller could treat as liquidated damages unless: The seller fails to tender marketable title to the buyer by the agreed-upon closing date, the seller commits a material breach of this contract, or the buyer dies prior to the closing date, in which case the earnest money shall be reimbursed to the buyer’s estate. The contract was signed on July 24, and the closing date was set for September 12. On August 5, the buyer was seriously injured in an accident. On September 10, the buyer was released from the hospital in a wheelchair. He determined that a ranch-style house would make his life much more bearable, but the seller’s home was two stories. The buyer asked the seller to cancel the contract and to refund the $4,000 earnest money. The seller refused. The buyer did not appear on the closing date. On September 16, the seller contracted to sell the home to a purchaser for $198,000. The closing occurred as planned on October 20. The buyer files suit against the seller, praying for a refund of the $4,000 earnest money. How much is the buyer likely to recover?
Read Details