FACTS
Teri entered into a contract with Jack to sell her home for $300,000. After the parties sign the contract; Teri learns of a Boston municipal rule that all firefighters must live within the Boston city limits. Teri then calls Jack to back out of the contract to sell her house, because of the municipal rule. Jack is asking the judge for specific performance, to force Teri to sell the house in accordance with the original contract. Teri argues that, although specific performance is usually appropriate in land sale contract cases, the judge has the discretion to deny specific performance.
ISSUE
The issue presented is whether part performance should be granted in a real estate contract when the buyer wants to rescind the contract because …show more content…
Russell, 353 Mass. 366, 231 N.E.2d 563 (1967), the homeowners made a verbal contract to sell their home, one of which was a police officer. It was determined that the home that they had anticipated on purchasing was outside of the geographical limits that a police officer was required to live. The court held that the purchasers were entitled to some relief; including, “in lieu of the relief granted by the final decree to specific performance upon payment of the purchase price less the amounts already paid as a deposit, as well as interest thereon.” The court determined that the defendants had not shown enough evidence that they couldn’t get other living arrangements in the city that the police officer works.
In Levin v. Peterson, 12 Mass. L. Rep. 704 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001), it was determined that a judge has considerable discretion to grant specific performance, but it is typically granted in cases involving the conveyance of land. According to Massachusetts law real property is unique and monetary damages are inadequate to remedy lost property.
In Benet v. Vernon, 2001 Mass. Super. LEXIS 200 (Mass. Super. Ct. Mar. 28, 2001), the court affirmed that a firm offer to purchase real estate that is accepted by the seller, constitutes a binding agreement that is enforceable by specific …show more content…
Russell, 353 Mass. 366, 231 N.E.2d 563 (1967), the court granted specific performance stating that there was not enough evidence showing that the defendants couldn’t locate other living quarters in the city. Similar to this case, there is no evidence that Teri has looked for other living quarters within the city and failed to locate anything acceptable.
Teri argues that, although specific performance is usually appropriate in land sale contract cases, the judge has the discretion to deny specific performance. A judge has a "reasonable range" of discretion to grant or deny specific performance, and “A decree of specific performance of a land sale agreement was affirmed because there was evidence sufficient to support the findings and there was insufficient evidence of inequitable conduct or dishonesty on the purchaser's part.” see Kaplan v. Bessette, 357 Mass. 233 (Mass. 1970). In this case, there is no evidence of inequitable conduct or dishonesty on Jack.
In Benet v. Vernon, 2001 Mass. Super. LEXIS 200 (Mass. Super. Ct. Mar. 28, 2001), a standard form offer to purchase real estate, when accepted by the seller, constitutes a binding agreement subject to enforcement by specific performance. Specific performance is typically only granted in disputes involving the conveyance of land, due to the unique nature of real property and the inadequacy of money damages. Teri accepted Jack’s offer and the purchase contract they entered into was valid, legal and
Teri entered into a contract with Jack to sell her home for $300,000. After the parties sign the contract; Teri learns of a Boston municipal rule that all firefighters must live within the Boston city limits. Teri then calls Jack to back out of the contract to sell her house, because of the municipal rule. Jack is asking the judge for specific performance, to force Teri to sell the house in accordance with the original contract. Teri argues that, although specific performance is usually appropriate in land sale contract cases, the judge has the discretion to deny specific performance.
ISSUE
The issue presented is whether part performance should be granted in a real estate contract when the buyer wants to rescind the contract because …show more content…
Russell, 353 Mass. 366, 231 N.E.2d 563 (1967), the homeowners made a verbal contract to sell their home, one of which was a police officer. It was determined that the home that they had anticipated on purchasing was outside of the geographical limits that a police officer was required to live. The court held that the purchasers were entitled to some relief; including, “in lieu of the relief granted by the final decree to specific performance upon payment of the purchase price less the amounts already paid as a deposit, as well as interest thereon.” The court determined that the defendants had not shown enough evidence that they couldn’t get other living arrangements in the city that the police officer works.
In Levin v. Peterson, 12 Mass. L. Rep. 704 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001), it was determined that a judge has considerable discretion to grant specific performance, but it is typically granted in cases involving the conveyance of land. According to Massachusetts law real property is unique and monetary damages are inadequate to remedy lost property.
In Benet v. Vernon, 2001 Mass. Super. LEXIS 200 (Mass. Super. Ct. Mar. 28, 2001), the court affirmed that a firm offer to purchase real estate that is accepted by the seller, constitutes a binding agreement that is enforceable by specific …show more content…
Russell, 353 Mass. 366, 231 N.E.2d 563 (1967), the court granted specific performance stating that there was not enough evidence showing that the defendants couldn’t locate other living quarters in the city. Similar to this case, there is no evidence that Teri has looked for other living quarters within the city and failed to locate anything acceptable.
Teri argues that, although specific performance is usually appropriate in land sale contract cases, the judge has the discretion to deny specific performance. A judge has a "reasonable range" of discretion to grant or deny specific performance, and “A decree of specific performance of a land sale agreement was affirmed because there was evidence sufficient to support the findings and there was insufficient evidence of inequitable conduct or dishonesty on the purchaser's part.” see Kaplan v. Bessette, 357 Mass. 233 (Mass. 1970). In this case, there is no evidence of inequitable conduct or dishonesty on Jack.
In Benet v. Vernon, 2001 Mass. Super. LEXIS 200 (Mass. Super. Ct. Mar. 28, 2001), a standard form offer to purchase real estate, when accepted by the seller, constitutes a binding agreement subject to enforcement by specific performance. Specific performance is typically only granted in disputes involving the conveyance of land, due to the unique nature of real property and the inadequacy of money damages. Teri accepted Jack’s offer and the purchase contract they entered into was valid, legal and