P's claim for specific performance arises out of an alleged agreement with D for the sale and purchase of a tract of land. In a document captioned 'Offer to Purchase,' D deposited $5,000 towards the purchase of the property for the sum of $565,000, with a total deposit of 5 percent of the sale price ($28,250) due upon signing of the purchase-and-sales agreement. D signed the document on September 7, 1993, after deleting the ninth condition, which read: '9. SUBJECT TO SELLER CEASING NEGOTIATIONS WITH ANY AND ALL OTHER PARTIES ON PURCHASE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY.' The agreement also contained a condition that provided: '6. SUBJECT TO SATISFACTORY PURCHASE & SALES AGREEMENT BETWEEN SELLER AND BUYER.' D sent the buyer an unsigned purchase-and-sale-agreement form. P signed the agreement and returned it to D. D requested and received an extension of time to sign the agreement. On October 20, 1993, the date the extension expired, D notified P that the seller wanted to 'get more money' for the property and would therefore put the property back on the market. P sued for breach of contract in Superior Court, seeking specific performance of the purchase-and-sale agreement. D made a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure. The Superior Court denied D's motion. D then made a motion for reconsideration, and on June 12, 1995, the Superior Court issued a written decision holding the offer-to-purchase agreement illusory and unenforceable. It granted the D's motion for judgment on the pleadings. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.