Penthouse International, Limited v. Dominion Federal Savings and Loan Association
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
855 F.2d 963 (1988)
- Written by Ron Leshnower, JD
Facts
Dominion Federal Savings and Loan Association (Dominion) (defendant) was one of several lenders that agreed to finance a hotel and casino being built by Penthouse International, Limited (Penthouse) (plaintiff) in Atlantic City, New Jersey. The loan commitment for all lenders was to expire on March 1, 1984. Penthouse was unable to meet various preclosing conditions (e.g., licensing from the casino-control commission, variances necessary for construction, public utility services). These preconditions remained outstanding a few weeks before the March 1 expiration date. Dominion expressed concerns about the ability to close and suggested that the construction-and-lending plan be overhauled. By mid-March 1984, the project had collapsed, and the lenders withdrew from the plan. Penthouse sued Dominion for damages, claiming that Dominion committed anticipatory breach of the agreement to participate in funding. Focusing on actions taken after the expiration date of March 1, 1984, the district court ruled that Dominion refused to proceed as agreed and, hence, committed an anticipatory breach. Dominion appealed, claiming that the district court erred by basing the decision on actions Dominion took after the loan-commitment expiration date.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Altimari, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 797,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.