Spinsky v. Kay
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
CONOVER, Judge.
Defendants-Appellants Anthony Paul Spinsky and Florence M. Spinsky (collectively, Spinsky) appeal the trial court's judgment in favor of Plaintif{-Appellee Carl Kay (Kay).
We affirm.
Spinsky presents five issues for our review, 1 which we restate as:
1. whether the trial court erred in ordering specific performance of an option to purchase real property when the purchase price was to be determined by appraisal;
2. whether the court erred in its determination of the property's worth;
8. whether the trial court erred in its determination of when the purchase option could be exercised;
4…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. ArmstrongIndiana Supreme Court · 1982
- Bud Wolf Chevrolet, Inc. v. RobertsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1988
- Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. v. TrainaIndiana Supreme Court · 1986
- Briggs v. Clinton County Bank & Trust Co. of FrankfortIndiana Court of Appeals · 1983
- Coles v. PeckIndiana Supreme Court · 1884
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dahlin v. Amoco Oil Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1991
- United Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. IraIndiana Court of Appeals · 1991
- Wenning v. CalhounIndiana Court of Appeals · 2005
- Dominion Investments v. YasechkoDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1991
- Dahlin v. Amoco Oil Corp.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.