Legal Opinion

Hessenthaler v. Farzin

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 3, 1989No. 00006PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HOFFMAN, Judge:

This is an appeal from an order and decree nisi directing appellants to specifically perform their obligations under a land sales agreement dated November 17, 1985, and ordering them to convey the property at issue to appellees. Appellants contend that the court erred in directing specific performance because: (1) the court erroneously relied on oral testimony when it held that a memorandum existed sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds; and (2) the only writing signed by appellants does not include the material term of financing. For the reasons that follow, we disagree,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Ecksel v. Orleans Construction Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  2. Beeruk EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1968
  3. Irving v. Goodimate Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  4. American Leasing v. Morrison Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  5. Burns v. BaumgardnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Donovan v. RRL Corp.California Supreme Court · 2001
  2. Flight Systems, Inc. v. Electronic Data Systems CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
  3. Zuk v. ZukSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  4. Long v. BrownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  5. Trowbridge v. McCaigueSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2010

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API