Saunders v. Sharp
| Decision Date | 12 February 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 900360,900360 |
| Citation | 806 P.2d 198 |
| Parties | Leon H. SAUNDERS; Robert Felton; Saunders Land Investment Corp., a Utah corporation; White Pine Ranches, a Utah general partnership; White Pine Enterprises, a Utah general partnership; and Kenneth R. Norton, dba Interstate Rentals, Inc., a Nevada corporation, Plaintiffs and Petitioners, v. John C. SHARP and Geraldine Y. Sharp, Defendants and Respondents. |
| Court | Utah Supreme Court |
Robert M. Anderson, Salt Lake City, for Leon H. Saunders, Robert Felton, and Saunders Land Inv. Corp.
Glen D. Watkins, Bruce Wycoff, Salt Lake City, for White Pine Ranches and White Pine Enterprises.
John B. Anderson, Salt Lake City, for Kenneth R. Norton and Interstate Rentals.
Donald J. Winder, Kathy A. F. Davis, Salt Lake City, for John C. and Geraldine Y. Sharp.
This matter is before the court on plaintiffs' petition for a writ of certiorari to review the decision of the court of appeals in Saunders v. Sharp, 793 P.2d 927 (Utah Ct.App.1990). The petition is granted. Further briefing by the parties and oral argument are deemed unnecessary, as the arguments in the petition briefs are adequate for our determination. This matter is remanded to the court of appeals for modification of its opinion in accordance with this opinion.
Plaintiffs purchased approximately sixty acres of unimproved real property from defendants under a contract which consisted of several separate memoranda to be interpreted together. Both parties agree that the property was to be developed and resold in residential lots consisting of four or five acres, as a planned unit development ("PUD"). Defendants, as sellers, agreed to release and convey one PUD lot upon receipt of each $140,000 paid in principal. Initially, plaintiffs platted only half the property. On December 23, 1983, the plat of phase I of the project was recorded in the office of the Summit County Recorder. Six five-acre lots and a private internal roadway were described on the plat. Defendants executed a deed to lots 1 through 5, as requested by plaintiffs, pursuant to the release clause of the contract.
Plaintiffs breached the contract by making only a partial payment on the real property taxes in November 1984. In addition, they were able to pay only a portion of the 1985 annual payment. Nevertheless, they state that they previously paid sufficient principal to cover the purchase price of the platted lot 6, all of the internal roadway of phase I, and 7.35 acres of the unplatted acreage. Plaintiffs claim that under the release clause of the contract, they are entitled to the release of all property paid for, in spite of their prior breach. By their complaint, plaintiffs sought conveyance of Defendants counterclaimed for foreclosure.
The trial court found that the contract required plaintiffs to designate the property to be conveyed pursuant to the release clause, and plaintiffs had never requested conveyance of any property except the first five platted lots. In its statements of applicable law, the trial court stated that plaintiffs' breaches were material, significant, and continuing and were uncured when plaintiffs requested release of the roadway, lot 6, and the additional 7.35 acres from the unplatted property. Accordingly, the trial court denied specific performance and granted judgment to defendants. Plaintiffs appealed, and the matter was poured-over to the Utah Court of Appeals for review.
On appeal, plaintiffs reiterated their claim that they are entitled, under the contract, to conveyance of all...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mitchell v. Wells Fargo Bank, Case 2:16–cv–00966–CW–DBP
... ... contract is ambiguous and evidence of the parties' intent (which is a matter of fact) is necessary to establish the terms of the contract." Saunders v. Sharp , 806 P.2d 198, 200 (Utah 1991). In the context of standardized contracts, moreover, Utah law recognizes the "rule of construction" ... ...
-
West v. Keil
... ... v. Palmer, 923 P.2d 1350, 1360 (Utah 1996); Hall v. Process Instruments & Control, Inc., 890 P.2d 1024, 1028 (Utah 1995); Saunders v. Sharp, 806 P.2d 198, 199 (Utah 1991) ... ¶ 16 In this case, defendants' brief contains a lengthy section purporting to marshal ... ...
-
Chen v. Stewart
... ... (quoting Saunders v. Sharp, 806 P.2d 198, 199 (Utah 1991) ) ... ¶77 More recently, the Utah Court of Appeals explained that "in order to properly ... ...
-
Platt v. Town of Torrey
... ... 2 We review each of the trial court's rulings for correctness. See Bagford v. Ephraim City, 904 P.2d 1095, 1097 (Utah 1995); Saunders v. Sharp, 806 P.2d 198, 199-200 (Utah 1991) (per curiam); Provo City Corp. v. Willden, 768 P.2d 455, 456 (Utah 1989) ... ANALYSIS ... ...
-
Utah Standards of Appellate Review
...all the evidence supporting the finding that is challenged. Alta Indus. Ltd. v. Hurst, 846 P.2d 1282, 1286 (Utah 1993); Saunders v. Sharp, 806 P.2d 198, 199 (Utah 1991); State v. Moosman, 794 P.2d 474, 475-76 (Utah 1990); Grayson Roper Ltd. v. Finlinson, 782 P.2d 467, 470 (Utah 1989); Reid ......