Peet v. Randolph
Missouri Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*616LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, Judge.
The question we must decide is whether a real estate contract lacked such definiteness and finality that it was incapable of specific performance, thereby justifying summary judgment. Because we conclude the issue is fairly disputable, we reverse summary judgment and remand for a trial on the merits.
Frederick J. Peet (Peet), for himself and as assignee of co-plaintiff Judith S. Keen (Keen) (collectively referred to as Purchasers), appeals from summary judgment entered in favor of George Randolph (Mr. Randolph) and Cecelia Randolph (Mrs. Randolph) (collectively…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited19 opinions
- ITT Commercial Finance Corp. v. Mid-America Marine Supply Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1993
- Brenner v. DuncanMichigan Supreme Court · 1947
- Computer Network, Ltd. v. Purcell Tire & Rubber Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1988
- Berry-Iverson Co. of North Dakota, Inc. v. JohnsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1976
- Myers v. LovetinskySupreme Court of Iowa · 1971
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- City of St. Joseph v. Lake Contrary Sewer DistrictMissouri Court of Appeals · 2008
- Don King Equipment Co. v. Double D Tractor Parts, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2003
- Peet v. RandolphMissouri Court of Appeals · 2003
- Space Planners Architects, Inc. v. Frontier Town-Missouri, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2003
- Clearly Canadian Beverage Corp. v. American Winery, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.