Legal Opinion
Sorce v. Rinehart
Wisconsin Supreme Court
Decided June 30, 1975No. 492PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBeilfuss, J.
Three issues are raised in this appeal:
1. Is the offer to purchase contract unenforceable because there was no meeting of the minds on the consequences of breach by buyers ?
2. Did seller’s retention of earnest money estop him from suing buyers for specific performance or damages?
3. Does public policy require the denial of damages due to the breach of this contract?
The offer to purchase provides in part:
“Should the undersigned Buyer fail to carry out this agreement, all money paid hereunder shall, at the option of the Seller, be forfeited as liquidated damages and shall be paid to or retained…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kallenbach v. Lake Publications, Inc.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1966
- Langer v. Stegerwald Lumber Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1952
- Findorff v. FindorffWisconsin Supreme Court · 1958
- Zimmermann v. ThompsonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Moritz v. BroadfootWisconsin Supreme Court · 1967
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago v. ThorpeAppellate Court of Illinois · 2000
- Mansfield v. SmithWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- Security Pacific National Bank v. GinkowskiCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 1987
- St. Norbert College Foundation, Inc. v. McCormickWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- Putnam v. Time Warner Cable of Southeastern Wisconsin, Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Wisconsin · 2001
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.