The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Hammond purchased land and cleared the land for use as a ski slope. From 1969 to 1979, the Red Hill Club leased the land from Hammond. In 1979, Hammond conveyed the land by quitclaim deed to the Club for nominal consideration with a condition subsequent. About a decade later the club began having problems and did not obtain permits for two years straight and closed during the 93-94 winter season. Ds then filed notice of reentry and possession claiming that the Club had breached its condition for failing to provide ski facilities for two consecutive years. the Club (P) sued Hammond (D) seeking a declaratory judgment regarding the relative rights of the parties. The trial court strictly construed the provisions of the condition subsequent and found that the obligation to provide skiing facilities only required P to maintain and make available the premises as a ski slope. The court then found that P did not breach that condition. D appealed.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.