Little Timmy signs a contract with Big Brad to buy Big Brad\'s 640-acre for $3,2

Question

Little Timmy signs a contract with Big Brad to buy Big Brad's 640-acre for $3,200,000. Big Brad orally offers to sell Big Brad's house in town for another $100,000. Little Timmy orally accepta that offer. At closing, Little Timmy tenders $3,300,000 for the ranch and the house. Big Brad accepts the $3,200,000 for the ranch and signs the deed. Big brad, however, refuses to sell the house for $100,000, and refuses the $100,000 tendered by Little Timmy. Little Timmy sues Big Brad for specific performance to buy the house. Who will prevail? Why?

Explanation / Answer

Little Timmy would prevail in this case because specific performance calls for the performance of the act mentioned in the contract when the actual performance is considered more valuable than the monetary damages. Specific performance is granted by the court only if the goods are unique. In this case Big Brad’s house which Timmy was offered for $100000 is a unique property and no other properties are similar to Big Brad’s house in town. The contract was orally agreed by Big Brad to sell both land and house for $3300000 though later he refused to sell the house for $100000 and Little Timmy has partially performed the contract by paying $3200000 for Big Brad’s land. Hence Little Tommy cannot return to the position prior to the contract formation and court would grant specific performance of the oral contract made by Big Brad to Little Timmy for selling the house.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse L
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.