Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Renovest Co. v. Hodges Development Corp.

New Hampshire Supreme Court
600 A.2d 448 (N.H. 1991)


Facts

On June 30, 1986, Renovest Co. (Renovest) (plaintiff) agreed to purchase an apartment complex from Hodges Development Corp. (Hodges) (defendant). Renovest paid a $65,000 deposit. The purchase and sale agreement contained two conditions precedent. The first required that Renovest’s inspection be completed within 14 business days and that if the inspection was unsatisfactory, Renovest could inform Hodges of its intent to void the contract, so long as such notice was within three days of the inspection. The second condition precedent was that if Renovest could not obtain sufficient financing within 45 days, it could void the contract. Upon execution of the agreement, Renovest started the process of obtaining financing. Renovest inspected the complex on July 10, and found a crack in one of the apartment buildings. On July 11, Renovest called Hodges to inform it of the crack and suggest that it hire a structural engineer to further inspect the building. After this, Renovest did not continue its pursuit of financing because it assumed that banks would not offer financing for the purchase of a cracked building. After further inspections, Renovest informed Hodges on August 7 that it was terminating the agreement on account of the inspection condition. On August 12, Renovest informed Hodges that its failure to obtaining financing constituted additional grounds for termination of the agreement. Hodges refused to return Renovest’s deposit. Renovest brought suit. The trial court granted Hodges’s motion to dismiss. Renovest appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Horton, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. 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.

  2. 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 220,000 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.