Steele v goettee

Lexis 91 The estate can rescind on the terms signed on the contract because the contact was unambiguous. The representative of the property being sold of Mrs. Chaney who died underestimated on the size of the property and recorded in the contact as 15, Sq Feet instead of 22, sq ft. Therefore, the broker Drs.

Steele v goettee

Smith [ Md Page 13] This case concerns an in gross contract for the sale of real estate and the determination of a trial court in a declaratory judgment action brought by the buyer that the seller should specifically perform the contract. We shall reverse the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals contained in Goettee Steele v goettee.

Aside from the issue of whether this was a sale in gross, the facts are undisputed. Those which we shall relate are gleaned from the findings of fact of the trial court or are uncontroverted facts taken from the record.

Under Maryland Rule when an action has been tried by the lower court without a jury, this Court will review the case upon both the law and the evidence, "but the judgment of the lower court will not be set aside on the evidence unless clearly erroneous and due regard will be given to the opportunity of the lower court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.

Chaney died on February 6, Goettee qualified as the personal representative under her will on March 8, She owned a home in Annapolis at Giddings and Forbes Avenues where she had lived for a number of years. Goettee is both an accountant and a lawyer.

He has been practicing law since about and began representing Mrs. Chaney in accounting matters back in the 's. Goettee testified that once he had qualified as personal representative he obtained plats and a tax map of Mrs. The tax map showed approximate dimensions [ Md Page 14] of feet across the front for the two lots owned by Mrs.

Chaney and approximately feet down the sides. From a realtor he obtained a plat prepared by a surveyor in that showed an area of approximately 17, square feet.

Goettee procured an appraisal of subject property under date of March 25, Goettee requested of an Annapolis surveyor a feasibility study of the property in question. He advised Goettee on April 16, City records indicate a 'gap' in boundaries and deed plotting likewise reflect a possible gap.

Field investigation indicates possession possibly different from title lines. In a contract dated May 14,Goettee listed this property with that realtor stating the area was approximately 15, square feet. The petitioners here were excluded as potential buyers from that listing as was Rev.

Lance, an adjoining landowner. Faust are physicians who practice in partnership.

Steele v goettee

They own a building directly across the street from the Chaney property. They proposed erection of a building on the Chaney property, if they could purchase it, of about 14, square feet, the size of the building occupied by them.

Faust paced off the Chaney property down two sides and concluded that the lot contained approximately 21, square feet, a conclusion he did not communicate to his attorney. Using information which he said he procured from the realtor to whom we have previously referred, this attorney prepared [ Md Page 15] for Steele and Faust a contract with Goettee for the sale of the subject property.The Plaintiff, Beachcomber Coins, Inc.

Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

(Plaintiff), a coin dealer bought $ in dime, minted in at the Denver mint, from the Defendant, Boskett (Defendant). After learning the coin was counterfeit, the Plaintiff sought to have the contract rescinded. In , the Court of Appeals rendered its decision in Crawford v.

Crawford, Md. , A.2d (). In that case, the Court of Appeals abolished the presumption of gift between separated spouses and permitted a spouse to seek contribution in those instances when married parties were not residing together and one of them, or the.

Beachcomber Coins, Inc. v. Boskett M.J.

Maryland Court of Appeals, State Courts, All Courts

Super. , A.2d 78 (N.J. Super A.D. ) Beachcomber bought a rare coin from a guy named Boskett for $, but soon after found that the coin was a counterfeit. Steele v. Goettee, Md. 11, A.2d , Web Md. Lexis 91 (Court of Appeals of Maryland) The representative should of done is a survey of the property, and get the correct information before putting the property is the market%(14).

Newsletter. Sign up to receive the Free Law Project newsletter with tips and announcements. We shall reverse the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals contained in Goettee v. Steele, 71 Md.

App. , A.2d (), and thus shall affirm the decree of the trial court that the seller specifically perform the contract.

Steele v. Goettee, Maryland Court of Appeals, State Courts, COURT CASE