Supreme Court of California
707 P.2d 232 (1985)
Juanita Gaspar sold a parcel of land to Kathy and Richard Petersen (plaintiff) in exchange for monthly payments of $50. The contract did not state time was of the essence. The Petersens missed a few monthly payments, eventually divorced, and ceased making payments on the contract altogether. At the time of divorce, the Petersens had timely made 58 out of the 65 payments due. Gaspar chose to terminate the contract. The following year, Gaspar died. Richard Petersen brought suit against the administratrix of Gaspar’s estate (defendant), tendering full payment on the contract and seeking specific performance. The trial court denied Richard specific performance. Richard appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Reynoso, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Bird, C.J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 222,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.