Cheney v. Jemmett case brief summary
693 P.2d 1031 (1984)
CASE FACTS
The sellers and buyers entered into a purchase agreement, which provided that the buyer's not sell the property or assign the contract without the sellers' approval. The buyers attempted to sell the property but because of the assignment limitation, entered into a rental agreement which provided for the sale of the property once the buyers' and sellers' contract was paid in full. The sellers discovered that the buyers had sold the property and declared a default of the parties' contract based on the buyers' rental agreement.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the district court's involuntary dismissal of the sellers' claims and the district court's denial of the sellers' motion to amend the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
693 P.2d 1031 (1984)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant sellers sought review from
the Fourth Judicial District of the State of Idaho, Valley County,
which ordered involuntary dismissal of the sellers' breach of
contract action against respondent buyers who moved for involuntary
dismissal, pursuant to Idaho Code § 41(b), after the presentation of
the sellers' case at trial. The trial court adopted all of the
buyers' and none of the sellers' submitted findings of fact and
conclusions of law.CASE FACTS
The sellers and buyers entered into a purchase agreement, which provided that the buyer's not sell the property or assign the contract without the sellers' approval. The buyers attempted to sell the property but because of the assignment limitation, entered into a rental agreement which provided for the sale of the property once the buyers' and sellers' contract was paid in full. The sellers discovered that the buyers had sold the property and declared a default of the parties' contract based on the buyers' rental agreement.
DISCUSSION
- On appeal, the court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not commit reversible error in adopting the buyers' findings of fact and conclusions of law and in not enforcing the sellers' non-assignment clause because the sellers unreasonably withheld their consent to the buyers' rental agreement.
- The court found that the adopted findings and conclusions were sufficiently supported by the evidence.
- The court ruled that the award of attorney fees and costs to the buyers was proper because the parties' agreement allowed for attorney fees in case of a dispute in the interpretation or enforcement of the contract.
CONCLUSION
The court affirmed the district court's involuntary dismissal of the sellers' claims and the district court's denial of the sellers' motion to amend the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment