Malus v. Hager
New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
712 A.2d 238 (1998)
Facts
Kenneth and Jean Hager (defendants) and Richard and Rosemary Malus (plaintiffs) signed a contract for the sale and purchase of the Hager's house. The contract was contingent on the Maluses' securing a loan commitment within 45 days. The contract also provided that if the Maluses failed to close on the purchase, the Hagers could keep the Maluses' down payment. The Maluses successfully obtained a bank's loan commitment within 45 days. However, four days before the scheduled closing date, and through no fault of his own, Mr. Malus lost his job, and the bank withdrew its loan commitment. By this time, the Hagers had moved from their house into temporary quarters, and it was four months before they managed to close on the sale of their house to another buyer. The Hagars incurred significant extra moving and storage costs due to the delay, and refused to refund the Maluses' down payment. In reliance on a 1988 case precedent, the trial court granted the Maluses' motion for summary judgment. The Hagars appealed to the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wefing, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 711,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
