Munro v. Beazer Home Corp.
Delaware Court of Common Pleas
2011 WL 2651910, 2011 Del. C.P. LEXIS 16 (2011)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Timothy Munro (plaintiff), an adjacent landowner, opposed a new retirement community and resulting sewer-line expansion planned by Kenneth Woodring (defendant). Unless Munro could obtain an exemption, the county could order him to connect his lot to the sewer line. To overcome Munro’s opposition, Woodring contractually promised to file papers for Munro’s exemption. Woodring also promised that if the county did order Munro’s sewer connection, Woodring would pay Munro’s hookup costs. However, Woodring took no action to file for Munro’s exemption. Later, Woodring gave Munro a second contract promising that once subdivision construction began, Woodring would connect Munro’s property to the sewer line at his own expense. Woodring subsequently ran into financial difficulty, sold the subdivision-development rights to Beazer Home Corporation (Beazer) (defendant), and repudiated the second contract. Although the county had not yet required Munro to connect to the sewer line, Beazer disclaimed any obligation to pay for the hookup. Munro sued Woodring and Beazer in the Delaware Court of Common Pleas.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Beauregard, 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.
