Legal Opinion

PMC, Inc. v. Porthole Yachts, Ltd.

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 24, 1998No. G018311PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

RYLAARSDAM, J.

This case involves the question of who is entitled to recover the deposit in an aborted boat purchase. The trial court awarded the deposit to PMC, Inc. (PMC), the buyer in the transaction. Porthole Yachts, Ltd. (Porthole), the seller, contends the trial court erred in finding PMC failed to accept a proposed modification concerning a marine survey contingency. Alternatively, Porthole argues PMC’s decision to reject the survey was not made in good faith. We conclude both contentions are without merit and affirm.

Facts

In July 1993, the parties executed a “Purchase Agreement,”…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Carma Developers (California), Inc. v. Marathon Development California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Mattei v. HopperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Third Story Music, Inc. v. WaitsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
  4. Steiner v. Mobil Oil Corp.California Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Larwin-Southern California, Inc. v. JGB Investment Co.California Court of Appeal · 1979

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Stearns v. Select Comfort Retail Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2010
  2. Storek & Storek, Inc. v. Citicorp Real Estate, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2002
  3. Hobin v. Coldwell Banker Residential Affiliates, Inc.Supreme Court of New Hampshire · 2000
  4. Helm Financial Corp. v. Iowa Northern Railway Co.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 2002
  5. Money Store Investment Corp. v. Southern California BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2002

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API