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

P and D entered a contract in which D agreed to sell P a parcel of land. The transaction was conditioned upon approval of a zoning request for an asphalt plant. If the zoning was not approved the contract was voidable. P had 120 days to get the approval. P send D a letter informing D of substantial opposition to the zoning change. P indicated it was still interested in the property, but at a lessor price. D responded and rejected the price concessions and said P could still buy at the original price. P then sent a letter on June 14th indicating he would buy at the original price. D responded on July 8th stating that the contract had been voided from the minute P asked for a price concession. D refused to perform and P sued D for specific performance. D moved for summary judgment. P discovered that no other parties were ready, able, and willing to purchase the property. The trial court granted D's motion for summary judgment without explaining the basis for its ruling. The trial court denied P's post-trial motion, declaring D's motion for summary judgment was granted because P had repudiated the contract. 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.