Meyer v. Kesterson
Oregon Court of Appeals
950 P.2d 896 (1997)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Tom and Heidi Meyer (plaintiffs) and Mary and Laurence Kesterson (defendants) agreed in writing that the Kestersons would sell their land to the Meyers. The Meyers made a down payment and agreed to pay the balance at closing. The agreement left open key terms such as the timing and amount of the Meyers’ monthly principal and interest payments. Moreover, the agreement described the property’s boundaries only in general terms, with an exact description to be provided at closing. However, the general description, an accompanying sketch of the property’s boundaries, and publicly available extrinsic evidence made the property’s dimensions clear and excluded the possibility that the parties had any other property in mind. The Kestersons later returned the Meyers’ down payment and informed them that the sale was off. The Meyers sued for specific performance. The Kestersons pleaded Oregon’s statute of frauds in defense. The trial court ruled for the Meyers, and the Kestersons appealed to the Oregon Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Riggs, 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.
