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

Merrit (P) entered into a contract with Windy (D) to purchase a majority interest in D's Yates County vineyard. and tendered a $15,000 deposit. The conditions of forfeiture of that deposit called for non-forfeiture in the event that D had not obtained title insurance or had not received confirmation from the Farmers Home Administration that the mortgages on the vineyard are in effect and that the sale would not constitute a default. P discovered at closing that neither the policy nor the confirmation had been issued. P refused to close and demanded his deposit. D refused and P sued. P's motion for summary judgment was denied which was reversed and the motion was granted with a dismissal of a consequential damages claim. Both parties 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.