Temple Hoyne Buell Foundation v. Holland & Hart
Colorado Court of Appeals
851 P.2d 192 (1992)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
The Buell Development Corporation (BDC) (plaintiff) hired Holland & Hart (Holland) (defendant) as its attorney in a transaction involving the sale of Kings County Development Corporation (KCDC) stock to a KCDC stockholder, John Rocovich. As part of the transaction, BDC was to acquire from Rocovich a percentage of KCDC’s minerals if KCDC ever chose to distribute minerals to its stockholders. Holland drafted BDC’s option contract with Rocovich. KCDC distributed its mineral interests to its stockholders, and BDC sought to enforce its option. KCDC refused, claiming that the option violated the rule against perpetuities. BDC filed a legal-malpractice suit against Holland based on the drafting of the option contract, claiming negligence and breach of contract. Holland sought a pretrial ruling that the option contract in fact did not violate the rule against perpetuities. The trial court found that the rule against perpetuities applied and that the option contract violated the rule. The jury awarded BDC over $3 million in damages and over $2 million in interest. Holland appealed, arguing that the trial court had erred in its determination that the rule against perpetuities applied to BDC’s option contract.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Smith, 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.