Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
O'Connor (D1) entered into an agreement to purchase property from NW (D). One of the purchase agreement's addenda stated that the offer was subject to final plat approval and that D warranted that final plat approval would occur prior to the closing date. The City did not approve the final plat and closing was delayed. D and D1 eventually agreed to close on four lots on June 15, 2000; six lots on August 15, 2000; eight more lots on December 1, 2000; and the last five lots on February 1, 2001. The City never issued final plat approval and the sale did not close. D1 assigned two of the future lots to United Builders of Washington. D signed two statutory warranty deeds conveying four lots by metes and bounds: two lots were conveyed to D1 and two lots were conveyed to United. The City issued building permits to build four model homes on these lots. D hired an engineer to complete the platting process and obtain final plat approval from the City. D encountered financial difficulties and could not pay to complete the platting process. D offered an as is sale to D1. D1 declined the offer and D sold the land to Tacoma Northpark (P). D did not inform P of its prior purchase agreement with D1. P filed a quiet title action against D, D1, United, and several lending organizations. D1 and United counterclaimed against P and cross-claimed against D for breach of contract. The court found that D had not breached the property sale agreement with D1 because D acted with 'good faith' trying to secure final plat approval. D1 and United appealed. D1 claimed that D failed to prove impossibility in getting plat approval.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co