Wolfle v. Daugherty
Decision Date | 07 November 1931 |
Citation | 137 So. 717,103 Fla. 432 |
Parties | WOLFLE v. DAUGHERTY. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Suit by R. H. Daugherty against C. C. Wolfle. From a final decree for the complainant, the defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court.
Where a contract, signed by the owner of land and accepted by a proposed purchaser, is a mere option to purchase, described lands within a stated time on specified conditions and for a consideration that is appropriate to and has reference only to the option granted, and the vendee had not duly accepted the terms specified and duly offered to perform, the vendee would then have no equitable interest in the land and no right to an equitable remedy, whatever may be the vendee's remedy at law for a default or breach by the vendor.
Where a contract contains terms that are appropriate to a contract for the sale of land, i. e., provides that if the sale and purchase are accomplished, the initial payment of $1,000 shall become a part of the purchase money, and that upon the failure of the vendor to furnish abstracts of title showing a good merchantable title in the vendor, free and clear of any incumbrances of any kind, and upon the vendee's attorney rendering a written opinion showing that the title is not merchantable, the vendor then becomes obligated to return the initial payment, and that if the vendee does not duly accept and perform, the initial payment is forfeited to the vendor the latter not being in default, such contract is not a mere option to purchase, and in such case if the vendor be in default he should return the money that would have been a part of the purchase money if the contemplated sale had resulted; and the vendor being in default and not returning the initial payment as agreed, the vendee, not being in default, may obtain an equitable vendee's lien for the amount paid or he may at his election bring an action at law to recover the amount paid. Appeal from Circuit Court, Duval County; De Witt T. Gray, judge.
Stanton Walker, of Jacksonville, for appellant.
Holland Rogers & Hazard, of Jacksonville, for appellee.
This appeal is from a final decree adjudicating a vendee's lien in real estate.
The bill alleged that appellant vendor on April 18, 1927, entered into a written agreement, viz.:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sparks v. Charles Wayne Group
...cases have long recognized a vendee's equitable lien for nondefaulting purchasers under real estate contracts. In Wolfe v. Daugherty, 103 Fla. 432, 137 So. 717 (1931), the Florida Supreme Court held that a vendee under an executory real estate contract has an equitable lien in the subject r......
-
McGuire v. Andre
...Cir., 59 F.2d 711, 87 A.L.R. 555; 3 A.L.R. p. 576; D. M. Ferry & Co. v. Hall, 188 Ala. 178, 66 So. 104, L.R.A.1917B, 620; Wolfle v. Daugherty, 103 Fla. 432, 137 So. 717. It is insisted, however, by the appellee that the present contract is only an option contract because there is no specifi......
-
Paine v. Ludlam
... ... appears from the instrument as a whole that it is more than ... Gompert ... v. Frost, 177 N.W. 71; Wolfle v. Daugherty, 137 So ... To hold ... that one should be denied access to the facts touching the ... situation of the parties in this ... ...
-
Roschman Partners v. S.K. Partners I, Ltd.
...activity ever accrued to the property to make it inequitable for the Goolsbys to retain it.67 So.2d at 539.3 See e.g. Wolfle v. Daugherty, 103 Fla. 432, 137 So. 717 (1931) (an option confers no equitable interest in real property until it is exercised); South Investment Corp. v. Norton, 57 ......