The Conklins (plaintiffs) contracted to sell the Davis (defendants) a residential property. After making a down payment, the Davis refused to complete the purchase because the contract of sale specified that the property have marketable title, and the Conklins’ claim of title was based on adverse possession. The contract did not require that the Conklins have perfect title of record, but required the title to be marketable and insurable. The Conklins sued to compel specific performance of the sale, and the Davis counterclaimed to rescind the contract and retrieve their down payment. The Conklins abandoned the claim for specific performance, and the trial proceeded on the Davis’ rescission claim. The trial court entered judgment for the Davis, and the Conklins appealed. The intermediate appellate court reversed, and directed that judgment be entered for the Conklins. The Davis appealed to the state supreme court.