Court Opinion

ID: 9602023
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:51:21.021786+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:00.201434
License: Public Domain

Judge Vaughn
dissenting:
I agree with the majority’s view of the meaning of the contract as it relates to the release of land from the operation of the deed of trust upon the payment of additional sums by plaintiff.
I do not agree that the judge erred when he declined to grant summary judgment in favor of defendant and thereby dismiss plaintiff’s action to enforce the contract “according to the terms thereof,” damages or other relief. We are not dealing with an option to purchase but with a contract of purchase and sale where, ordinarily, time is not of the essence. Moreover, plaintiff, according to the affidavits, went into possession under the contract of sale shortly after its execution on 25 September 1972 and has expended over $160,000.00 in development of the property. Plaintiff’s failure to pay the additional $75,000.00 on 1- March 1973, whether prompted by a dispute over the terms of the contract, the existence of unsatisfied liens against the property or other reasons, did not, as a matter of law, constitute an abandonment of the contract and did not entitle defendants, on 28 March 1973, to “cancel” the contract without reasonable and formal notice to plaintiff that if plaintiff did not fulfill its obligations, defendants would not consider themselves bound.