King v. Wenger
Supreme Court of Kansas
549 P.2d 986 (1976)
- Written by Richard Lavigne, JD
Facts
Loraine Wenger (defendant) owned a half interest in a parcel of real property. Wenger’s sister owned the other half interest. Wenger’s mother held a life estate in the property. King (plaintiff) informed Wenger that he was interested in purchasing the property. Wenger and King discussed the offer to purchase with Wenger’s mother. Wenger discussed the offer by telephone with her sister. Wenger prepared a handwritten purchase agreement. King signed the agreement. Wenger signed the agreement on her own behalf and further indicated that she was signing on behalf of her sister. Wenger’s mother did not sign the agreement. Wenger and King agreed to meet with Wenger’s attorney to have a formal purchase agreement drawn up. King presented his own attorney with checks for a down payment in accordance with the terms of the hand written agreement. Wenger’s attorney prepared a formal purchase agreement, which he delivered to the parties by mail. Wenger refused to sign the agreement because it included terms that she had not negotiated or agreed upon with King. Wenger’s attorney drafted a second purchase agreement. Wenger refused to sign the revised agreement and notified her attorney that she had entered into a purchase agreement with another party. King presented Wenger with a down payment in accordance with the hand written agreement and filed suit seeking specific performance of the agreement. After a bench trial, the court denied King’s plea for specific performance. King appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fromme, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.