Handy v. Gordon
California Supreme Court
65 Cal. 2d 578 (1967)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
M. E. Gordon (defendant) agreed to sell approximately 320 acres of land to C. Jon Handy (plaintiff). Handy planned to develop a subdivision on the land. The majority of the purchase price was to be covered by a promissory note issued by Handy to Gordon secured by a trust deed on the property. Handy and Gordon’s contract contained a subordination clause in which Gordon agreed to subordinate his trust deed to future trust deeds used to secure construction loans and additional financing. The subordination clause listed maximum loan amounts that Handy could take on per lot but did not define how many lots the land was to be subdivided into. Later, Gordon sought to rescind the contract. Handy brought an action in court seeking a remedy of specific performance of the contract. Gordon moved for a judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the subordination clause lacked essential terms, rendering the whole agreement too uncertain to be enforceable. The trial court granted Gordon’s motion, and Handy appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Traynor, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
