King v. Wenger – Case Brief

Posted by LawRiotAdmin on March 24th, 2010

Property

Brief

King v. Wenger

Procedural History:

Facts:

Defendants owned an undivided half interest in the property subject to a life estate in their mother.
The mothers health was failing she suggested selling the land.
- The daughters agreed.
The daughters approached the plaintiff to have it appraised and he instead expressed interest in purchasing the property.
All three parties discussed the sale and the ailing mother agreed.
Purchase price of $16,000 was agreed on.
The other sister was contacted by phone, she lived in Colorado, and the terms of the sale were agreed on generally.
The parties drew up an agreement and then agreed to meet later that day in the office of the plaintiff’s attorney.
The two parties discussed the sale with the attorney but the attorney did not have time that day to draw a formal contract.
Formal written contract was never signed by Wenger.
There was a draft sent to the daughter but the attorney was advised that the contract was not in accordance with the previous understanding.
On January 29^th the revised contract was rejected and returned to plaintiff’s attorney and at which time she advised that the property had been sold.
Wengers had sold on Jan. 20.

Issue:

Holding:

Reasoning:

The plaintiff has never made any payment for the purchase.
The court looked at the intent of the parties and the court concluded that the mere intent to reduce a contract to formal writing is not sufficient.
It is obvious that the intent of the parties as to the continued negotiation of the terms was that the terms were not agreed to.
Neither party had begun performance under the informal agreement.
The informal agreement was only executed by one of the three co-owners of the property.
Although it was presumed that one sister signed for the other, she had no authorization to do so.
The court concludes no binding contract was entered into.