Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
The buyers (P) in the contract at issue paid a deposit to the sellers (D), and made an offer to D which provided that the payment was to be returned 'should proposition be rejected by owner, or prior sale of said property; or should the title be found unmarketable.' The offer further provided for closing within ten days of the date of delivery of an abstract of title. D's acceptance contained an express provision that D would furnish an updated abstract showing marketable title. Upon receipt of the abstract, P's attorney examined it and found that it was not marketable, concluding that there was or might be an outstanding one-half interest in the property. P indicated to D that they would not accept the title, and demanded that some action be taken to clear it. A deed was prepared for the holder of the outstanding one-half interest, but he refused to sign it. D made no further attempts to clear the title. The evidence also indicates that the parties had attempted to negotiate a return of P's deposit, but these fell through. P then sued, alleging that D was in a position to convey good title, and seeking specific performance as well as a decree requiring D to clear the title. The lower court concluded that P was not entitled to such relief. P appeals.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co