Heinzel v. Backstrom
Oregon Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.
Plaintiffs Rodger and Judith Heinzel brought this action for specific performance of an agreement for the sale of real property owned by defendant Backstrom. The first and dispositive issue is whether the agreement is a contract. The trial court found the agreement to be a contract; but it also found that because the Heinzels had not tendered performance by the agreed closing date, Backstrom had been free to sell the property to the defendants Johnson. 1 The Court of Appeals reversed. It found the agreement to be a contract, that the Heinzels had tendered performance within a “reasonable…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wood v. . Duff-GordonNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- ASPINWALL v. RyanOregon Supreme Court · 1951
- Quillin v. PeloquinOregon Supreme Court · 1964
- Cottrell Et Ux. v. Prier Et Ux.Oregon Supreme Court · 1949
- Wright v. Astoria Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Eden Gate, Inc. v. D&L Excavating & Trucking, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Oregon Trail Electric Consumers Cooperative, Inc. v. Co-Gen Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2000
- Porter v. Oba, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2002
- Swanson v. WarnerCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- Williams v. WiseCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.