Wednesday, December 25, 2013

Luttinger v. Rosen case brief

Luttinger v. Rosen case brief summary
316 A.2d 757 (1972)

CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendants appealed from a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas in Fairfield County at Stamford (Connecticut), which held that plaintiffs were entitled to recover a deposit on the purchase price of a house.

CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs contracted to purchase a house owned by defendants and paid a deposit, which was to be returned if plaintiffs were unsuccessful in obtaining financing as provided in the contract. Plaintiffs obtained a mortgage commitment that failed to meet the contract requirement. Plaintiffs gave timely notice to defendants and demanded the return of the down payment. Defendants' counsel offered to make up the difference between the interest rate offered by the bank and the interest rate provided in the contract. Plaintiffs did not accept the offer and sued after defendants refused to return the deposit. From a judgment rendered in favor of plaintiffs, defendants appealed. \

DISCUSSION

  • The court on appeal disagreed with defendants' claim that plaintiffs did not use due diligence in seeking a mortgage within the terms specified in the contract. 
  • There was no error in excluding testimony relating to defendants' subsequent offer, since the offer was irrelevant.

CONCLUSION
The judgment that held that plaintiffs were entitled to recover from defendants the deposit on the purchase price was affirmed because plaintiffs could not obtain financing in accordance with terms of the contract, and such financing was a condition precedent.


Suggested law school study materials

Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.