Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
The Mattuscheks (D) were brothers who owned a ranch which they operated as a grain and stock enterprise. Carnell, a real estate broker, heard that D's ranch might be for sale. He drove out to the ranch and met with D. The parties entered a written agreement giving Carnell the exclusive right to sell the property. The agreement described the property, the sale price, and the terms under which the property was to be sold. It was signed by both brothers. A few days later, Ward (P) agreed to buy the ranch for the price stated in the agreement between Carnell and D. P gave Carnell a check as a 'binder' on the agreement. P also executed a paper in which he stated that he agreed to buy the ranch under the terms stated in the agreement between D and Carnell. When Carnell told D that he had sold the property, they asked if P would lease a portion of the property back to them. Carnell got P's oral consent to this arrangement and arranged a meeting between the parties to close the sale and work out the details of the lease-back arrangement. During the meeting, a disagreement arose, and D refused to convey the property to P. P sued for specific performance on the contract. The statute of frauds defense was raised. The lower court found that the writings produced were insufficient to satisfy the statute of frauds.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co