Legal Opinion
Clay v. Hanson
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided January 29, 1988No. 85-1741PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROGERS, Associate Judge:
Ozzie Clay appeals the grant of a motion for summary judgment on his complaint for damages and specific performance of a contract for the sale of 2812 Chesterfield Place, N.W. with appellee Alton Hanson. 1 Hanson defends this judgment on the grounds that Clay failed to comply with the rules for summary judgment, the agreement did not satisfy the statute of frauds, and any agreement with Clay is subordinate to a subsequent contract with the tenants. We agree that Clay has failed to meet the requirements of the statute of frauds. Although a memorandum of contract can…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Crabtree v. Elizabeth Arden Sales Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1953
- Williams v. GerstenfeldDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Martin v. SeigelWashington Supreme Court · 1949
- Spellman v. American Security Bank, N.A.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1986
- Hackney v. Morelite ConstructionDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1980
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Atkins v. Industrial Telecommunications Ass'nDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1995
- Rumber v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Timberlake v. HeflinWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1989
- UHAR & COMPANY, INC. v. JacobDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- In Re Capitol Hill GroupDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2005
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.