Homler v. Malas
Georgia Court of Appeals
494 S.E.2d 18 (1997)
- Written by Ron Leshnower, JD
Facts
Robert Homler and Barbara Homler (plaintiffs) signed a contract to sell their single-family home to Mohannad Malas (defendant). The contract included a financing contingency requiring Malas to obtain a mortgage covering a term of at least 30 years and 80 percent of the sale price. The interest rate and monthly payment amount were left blank in the contract. The Homlers subsequently sued Malas for breach of contract, alleging that he did not make a good-faith effort to meet the financing contingency. Malas claimed that the contract was too vague to be enforceable, arguing that the financing contingency’s terms were not properly identified. The superior court agreed and granted Malas’s motion for summary judgment. The Homlers appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McMurray, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
