Burks v. Verschuur, 74--188

Decision Date17 December 1974
Docket NumberNo. 74--188,74--188
PartiesB. W. BURKS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Leroy L. and Carol A. VERSCHUUR, Defendants-Appellees. . I
CourtColorado Court of Appeals

Yegge, Hall & Evans, Richard F. Mauro, Bruce L. Jarchow, Denver, for plaintiff-appellant.

Lohf & Barnhill, P.C., Michael G. Massey, Denver, Butler D. Shaffer, Omaha, for defendants-appellees.

RULAND, Justice.

In an action for declaratory judgment relative to the payment provisions of a contract for the purchase of land, plaintiff, B. W. Burks, appeals from a judgment entered in the amount of $5,375 for defendants, Leroy L. and Carol A. Verschuur, on their counterclaim. We reverse.

All material facts in this case were established by stipulation of the parties and written documents received in evidence. On December 31, 1969, Burks entered into a written contract with the Verschuurs whereby Verschuurs agreed to sell and Burks agreed to purchase approximately 160 acres of land in Routt County. The purchase price was $90,000, payable $5,000 upon execution of the contract, $21,100 on January 30, 1970, and three annual installments thereafter of $21,300, together with interest of seven and one-half percent per annum on the deferred balance of the purchase price. Verschuurs agreed by the contract to 'release any contiguous 20 acre tract for payment on the principal of $750.00 per acre.'

Verschuurs' counsel prepared and the parties executed a written addendum to the contract to clarify certain terms. Insofar as material here, the addendum provided:

'It is further understood, in respect to the provision relating to the release of a contiguous 20 acre tract for payment on the principal of $750.00 per acre, that said $750.00 per acre amount shall be in addition to any payments previously made, and that the purchaser shall upon his payment of $750 per acre, be credited with $10,000 ($500 per acre multiplied by the i0 acres thus released) on the next arising principal payment as set forth under the agreement.'

The balance due on the purchase price was represented by a promissory note secured by a deed of trust.

Burks paid the 1971 annual installment. In 1972 Burks paid the Verschuurs $15,000 and requested a release on 20 acres. Verschuurs supplied the requested release, credited Burks with $10,000 on the annual installment due for 1972, and Burks then paid the balance of $11,300 due on the annual installment plus accrued interest.

On January 30, 1973, plaintiff paid $14,495 to Verschuurs representing all accrued interest (including interest on the $5,000 which was not credited to the 1972 annual installment) and the final principal installment due less a credit for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Planned Pethood Plus, Inc. v. KeyCorp, Inc.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • January 21, 2010
    ...but any associated prepayment penalty must be specifically provided in the contract. Kirk, 49 P.3d at 1193 (citing Burks v. Verschuur, 35 Colo. App. 121, 532 P.2d 757 (1974)). Despite carrying the designation "penalty," these provisions, also known as prepayment fees or premiums, "serve a v......
  • Heath v. Parker
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • November 24, 2000
    ...and Denver View. Neither did the Shelf Road provide access to the top of Bighorn Mountain and the Crow's Nest. See Burks v. Verschuur, 35 Colo.App. 121, 532 P.2d 757 (1974) (appellate court is not bound by the trial court's findings relative to evidence consisting of written In contrast to ......
  • Kirk v. Kitchens
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • April 11, 2002
    ...right to refuse early payment, any prepayment penalty or premium must be specifically provided in the contract. See Burks v. Verschuur, 35 Colo.App. 121, 532 P.2d 757 (1974)(if a mortgagee is to seek a premium or penalty upon prepayment, the mortgagee must specifically provide for it in the......
  • Vessels Oil & Gas Co. v. Coastal Refining & Marketing, Inc.
    • United States
    • Colorado Court of Appeals
    • October 20, 1988
    ...grounds, 200 Colo. 72, 612 P.2d 92 (1980); Pastor v. San Juan School District No. 1, 699 P.2d 418 (Colo.App.1985); Burks v. Verschuur, 35 Colo.App. 121, 532 P.2d 757 (1974). Cf. Norden v. E.F. Hutton & Co., 739 P.2d 914 (Colo.App.1987). Waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a known ri......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT