Legal Opinion

Knick v. Humphries

Alleghany County Circuit Court

Decided October 18, 1977Published

1Opinion of the Court

BY JUDGE ROSCOE B. STEPHENSON, JR.

Having maturely considered the law and the evidence presented, I conclude that Mr. Knick is not entitled to specific performance.

“In order for a litigant to avail himself of the remedy of specific performance, ‘he must show that he has been able, ready, prompt, eager and willing to perform the contract on his part. He must not have remained quiet or held himself aloof so as to enforce or abandon the contract as events might prove advantageous’.” Keutt v. Jordan, 207 Va. 869, 873, 153 S.E.2d 197, 200 (1967); Mundy v. Hesson, 215 Va. 386, 391, 209 S.E.2d 917,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mundy v. HessonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1974
  2. Reutt v. JordanSupreme Court of Virginia · 1967
  3. Huselton v. RoopSupreme Court of Virginia · 1974
  4. Verling v. QuarlesSupreme Court of Virginia · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API