Porter v. Harrington
Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
159 N.E. 530 (1928)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
In 1919, the plaintiff contracted to buy two parcels of land from the defendants with the purchase price payable in installments. The contract provided that if the plaintiff did not make payments promptly, the defendants had the option to void the contract, keeping all installment payments made up to their invocation of the option as liquidated damages. The plaintiff made his payments on time for the first three years after the contract was executed and, in consideration of the amount paid, the defendants conveyed one of the parcels of land in 1922. Thereafter, the plaintiff’s payments started to be made late and the plaintiff fell into default and way behind on his payments. For about four years, however, the defendants accepted these late payments without objecting to their tardiness. In November 1926, the plaintiff offered to make a payment as had been protocol for the previous four years. However, the defendants informed the plaintiff that they had exercised their option to void the contract on account of the late payments, effective August 1926. They also informed the plaintiff that they would be keeping all of his payments made to date as liquidated damages. Subsequently, the plaintiff offered to pay the full contract price, but the defendants declined to accept it. The plaintiff filed suit for specific performance of the contract. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rugg, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.