Legal Opinion
Ninety Nine Investment, Ltd. v. Overseas Courier Service
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 2, 2003No. B158569PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DOI TODD, J.
Appellant Ninety Nine Investments, Ltd., as the buyer, sought specific performance of a real estate purchase and sale agreement from respondent Overseas Courier Service (Singapore) Private, Ltd. (Overseas), the seller. Following a bench trial, the court denied specific performance and awarded judgment in favor of Overseas. Appellant contends that it was ready, willing and able to perform, but that it was prevented from performing by Overseas. We agree and reverse the judgment.
*1121FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The Agreement
Appellant and Overseas each have a one-half interest…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Carma Developers (California), Inc. v. Marathon Development California, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1992
- Bickel v. City of PiedmontCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
- Third Story Music, Inc. v. WaitsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- Rubin v. FuchsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1969
- Erich v. GranoffCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Rutherford Holdings, LLC v. Plaza Del ReyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2014
- Hines v. LukesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- People v. Financial Casualty & Surety, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2017
- Harper v. Poortinga CA4/1California Court of Appeal · 2021
- In re: Flashcom, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.