Wiki Law School will soon be moving! Please update your bookmarks. Our future address is www.wikilawschool.org |
Sullivan v. Porter
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Sullivan v. Porter | |
Court | Maine Supreme Judicial Court |
---|---|
Citation | 861 A.2d 625 |
Date decided | November 2, 2004 |
Facts
- The Porter couple = "Porter" = owner of a 52-acre farm
- Ms. Sullivan = "Sullivan" managed the stables on the Porter farm = buyer
- In August 2000, Porter verbally offered to sell the entire farm to Sullivan for $350,000 with a $20,000 down payment & a financing rate between 5% to 7%
- Sullivan (buyer) verbally accepted Porter's offer
- Sullivan announced that they would refinance their home to obtain the down payment for the Porter farm
- In September 2000, Porter moved out, giving the keys to Sullivan
- Sullivan moved in, making improvements to the stables & trails
- In November, Sullivan tendered $10,000 towards the down payment
- At that point, Porter refused to accept the money until the paperwork was ready; nevertheless, Porter did accept $3,000
- Sullivan, opened their business on the farm & continued renovating the farm
- In June 2005, Sullivan sent Porter an appraisal valuing the farm at only $250,000; at the same time, Sullivan stated that they would abide by their side of the contract
- Having seen the lowered appraisal at $250,000, Porter dug in his heels and demanded an even higher price of $450,000 for the farm
Procedural History
- Sullivan sued Porter seeking an order for specific performance.
- At the Maine state trial court, the court ordered Porter to execute a purchase contract at the original $350,000
- Porter lost
Issues
Is the part-performance doctrine an exception to the statute of frauds requirement that real property transfers must be in writing?
Holding
Yes. The part-performance doctrine constitutes an exception to the statute of frauds requirement that real property transfers must be in writing.
Judgment
Affirmed