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

Cumbest (P) and Harris (D) contracted for the sale and purchase of certain hi-fi equipment. The transaction was in effect a loan agreement with P having the right to repurchase the equipment on or before 5:00 p.m. Monday, June 7, 1976. When it came time for P to repay D, D deliberately evaded P. In desperation, P deposited the monies with D's landlord on the evening of June 7. P sued for specific performance on grounds that the equipment took several years to assemble. P testified that the parts of the system could not function alone, that many of the system parts could no longer be replaced, and that many of the parts that are replaceable take from 6 months to two years to assemble the parts. D put on no witnesses. The court did not rule in P's favor. P appealed.

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.