Hutton v. Gliksberg
California Court of Appeal
128 Cal. App. 3d 240 (1982)

- Written by Josh Lee, JD
Facts
Brian Hutton and Albert Ruddy (plaintiffs) entered into a contract to purchase certain real estate. Under the contract, Mike and Sheina Gliksberg (defendants) agreed to sell the property for $750,000, which would have been paid with $250,000 cash, a $400,000 bank loan, and a $100,000 additional loan from the Gliksbergs. The sale transaction was scheduled to close in April 1977. At that time, the prevailing interest rates were approximately 9.25 percent. Hutton and Ruddy complied with all obligations and were ready to close, but the Gliksbergs refused to complete the transaction. Hutton and Ruddy sued the Gliksbergs, seeking specific performance. The trial court ruled in favor of Hutton and Ruddy and entered an order requiring the Gliksbergs to convey the property. The trial court also awarded compensation to Hutton and Ruddy in the amount of $122,219 due to the increase in interest rates from 9.25 percent to 14 percent. The Gliksbergs appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Ashby, 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.