Prue v. Royer, Sr., and Department of Liquor Control
Supreme Court of Vermont
1Opinion of the CourtDooley, J.
¶ 1. The parties in this case entered into a real estate agreement nearly thirteen years ago, and this case requires us to determine its repercussions. The trial court concluded that the agreement constituted a contract for deed and that the purchasers had therefore acquired an equitable interest in the property in question. The court initiated a foreclosure on that interest, even though it had not been pled. Plaintiffs, the purchasers as found by the superior court — David and Barbara Prue, appeal from the foreclosure. Defendant, the seller as found by the court — Larry Royer, appeals from…
2Cases cited54 opinions
- Albemarle Paper Co. v. MoodySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Neece v. A. A. A. Realty Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1959
- SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Secrest v. SECURITY NATIONAL MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2002-2California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Department of Corrections v. Matrix Health Systems, P.C.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2008
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Kellogg v. ShusherebaSupreme Court of Vermont · 2013
- Mongeon Bay Properties, LLC v. Mallets Bay Homeowner's Assn., Anthony J. Sineni and Merrimack Mortagage Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 2016
- Drayton v. DraytonSupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2016
- Brattleboro Savings and Loan Association v. HardieSupreme Court of Vermont · 2014
- Commercial Construction Endeavors, Inc. v. Ohio Security Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Vermont · 2019
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.