Southport Congregational Church – United Church of Christ v. Hadley

320 Conn. 103, 128 A.3d 478 (2016)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Southport Congregational Church – United Church of Christ v. Hadley

Connecticut Supreme Court
320 Conn. 103, 128 A.3d 478 (2016)

Facts

On September 22, 2010, Albert Hadley (Albert) signed a will devising real estate to Southport Congregational Church-United Church of Christ (the church) (plaintiff). On March 6, 2012, Albert wrote a letter pledging to sell the property and to donate the proceeds of the sale to Cheekwood Botanical Garden and Museum of Art (Cheekwood). On March 21, 2012, Hadley contracted to sell the property to Winn. The contract included a mortgage-contingency clause which stated that if Winn did not notify Albert of her inability to obtain financing within 21 days, the contract would remain in full force and effect. If Winn notified Albert that she was unable to obtain financing, then the contract would be null and void. Albert died on March 30, 2012, prior to the end of the mortgage-contingency period. Betty Ann Hadley (Betty) (defendant) and Lee Snow (defendant), the co-executors of Albert’s estate, were ordered to sell the property. The church claimed that, because it was a specific devisee under Albert’s will, its consent to the sale was necessary. Cheekwood filed a claim for the sale proceeds, arguing that, pursuant to the doctrine of equitable conversion, when Albert signed the contract with Winn, Albert’s ownership interest in the property terminated, leaving him with only an interest in the sale proceeds, which belonged to Cheekwood. The trial court found for Cheekwood, and the intermediate appellate court reversed. Cheekwood appealed to the Connecticut Supreme Court. On appeal, the church argued that the mortgage-contingency clause was an unsatisfied condition precedent to the contract. Therefore, the contract was not yet enforceable at the time of Albert’s death and title could not have passed to Winn.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Robinson, J.)

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 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership