Legal Opinion

W.M., R.W., & T.R. Bowler v. TMG Partnership

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided October 30, 1984No. C7-84-781Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SEDGWICK, Judge.

This is an appeal by the vendor of real estate, TMG Partnership, from a judgment of the trial court that the vendee, Bowler, a partnership, was entitled to return of earnest money he paid pursuant to a purchase agreement. We affirm.

FACTS

TMG owned a small shopping center in Edina. Bowler contacted Steve Larson, a listing agent for Thorpe Bros, and negotiated a purchase agreement for the property. The agreement contained the following provision.

*110This agreement is contingent upon the Buyers conducting a physical inspection of said building. Buyers will have 10 business days…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Shaughnessy v. EidsmoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  2. Nodland v. ChirpichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  3. Pogreba v. O'BrienSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947

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

Powered by the Exa API