Smith v. First Provident Corp., 18329
| Decision Date | 12 April 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 18329,18329 |
| Citation | 245 S.C. 509,141 S.E.2d 646 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Clarence S. SMITH, Respondent, v. FIRST PROVIDENT CORPORATION, Appellant. |
Rogers W. Kirven, Florence, for appellant.
George W. Keels, Florence, for respondent.
This is an appeal from an Order of the Honorable G. Badger Baker, Resident Judge of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit, wherein the report of the Special Referee, recommending rescission of a written contract between Respondent's predecessor in title and Appellant for the sale of lots in a subdivision near the City of Florence, South Carolina, was affirmed and the contract ordered rescinded.
Appellant contends that the contract covers the entire tract of 160 acres owned by Respondent and is not limited to a portion thereof and that the lower Court erred in ordering the contract rescinded.
The contract in question, entered into in or about November, 1959, reads, in part, as follows:
'Whereas: Mrs. Anna Belle E. Smith is the owner of a tract of land situate, lying and being in the county of Florence about one and one-half (1 1/2) miles north of the City of Florence South Carolina, and is known as Park View Terrace, containing twenty-four (24) lots as shown on a plat of the said property recorded in Plat Book P at page 156 in the office of the Clerk of Court for Florence County, hereinafter referred to as party of the second part.
The express provision clearly applies only to the twenty-four lots mentioned therein with the provision that other lots may be added in the future. Examination of the record discloses ample evidentiary support that the parties did not subsequently agree to include additional land or lots. Respondent and his wife, who formerly owned the land, each denied that any agreement was reached to add additional land or lots to Park View Terrace. Mr. Robert Quarles, a former employee of Appellant, testified that no final agreement was reached between Appellant and Respondent concerning any other land. A plat prepared by Willie Banks, a surveyor, reveals additional lots Number 26 through 98 were designated 'Proposed Subdivision Smith Property May 4, 1960.' Mr. Banks testified the same was 'the preliminary plat to show a proposed area subject to approval by the parties concerned.' In a previous complaint brought by Respondent's predecessor in title, in June, 1960, to rescind the same contract, reference is made to the same subdivision as having twenty-four lots; and this allegation was admitted by answer thereto.
The general rule is that breach of a contract, to warrant...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Medivox Productions, Inc. v. Hoffmann-LaRoche, Inc.
...going to the essence of the contract may under appropriate circumstances justify the remedy of rescission. Smith v. First Provident Corp., 245 S.C. 509, 141 S.E.2d 646 (Sup.Ct.1965); Gaertner v. Rees, 259 Minn. 299, 107 N.W.2d 365 (Sup.Ct.1961). This remedy, however, is generally only avail......
-
Martin v. Carolina Water Service, Inc.
...of a contract has occurred; and without a substantial and fundamental breach, there can be no rescission. Smith v. First Provident Corp., 245 S.C. 509, 141 S.E.2d 646 (1965); Davis v. Cordell, 237 S.C. 88, 115 S.E.2d 649 We need not address Carolina Water Service's additional sustaining gro......
-
Tappan Motors, Inc. v. Volvo of America Corp.
...(Jacob & Youngs v. Kent, 230 N.Y. 239, 243-244, 129 N.E. 889; Hoffmann v. Danielson, 251 Wis. 34, 27 N.W.2d 759; Smith v. First Provident Corp., 245 S.C. 509, 141 S.E.2d 646; cf. Fifty States Mgt. Corp. v. Pioneer Auto Parks, 46 N.Y.2d 573, 577, 475 N.Y.S.2d 800, 389 N.E.2d 113, In this ins......
-
General Sprinkler Corp. v. Loris Industrial Developers, Inc.
...to perform". Davis v. Cordell, supra. Elliott v. Schneider, 246 S.C. 186, 143 S.E.2d 374 (1965). See also Smith v. First Provident Corp., 245 S.C. 509, 141 S.E.2d 646 (1965) wherein the court reiterated the foregoing rule and stated "`The right to rescind or terminate a contract on the grou......