Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Kuish v. Smith, No. G040743

By FindLaw Staff on February 11, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In plaintiff's suit against defendants to recover $620,000 deposit after he unilaterally canceled escrow, arising from an agreement to purchase defendants' beach residence for $14 million, trial court's judgment in favor of defendants is reversed and remanded where: 1) in a rising market, the seller of real property is limited to the recovery of consequential damages and interest against the buyer who breached the purchase agreement; 2) defendants' retention of plaintiff's deposit in the circumstance of a rising market, presented here, constituted an invalid forfeiture under Freeman v. Rector; and 3) the trial court erred by concluding defendants were entitled to plaintiff's deposit as separate and additional consideration for defendants' agreements to extend escrow. 

Read   Kuish v. Smith, No. G040743  [HTML]

Read   Kuish v. Smith, No. G040743 [PDF]

Appellate Information

Filed February 10, 2010


Opinion by Judge Fybel

For Appellant:   Samuels, Green & Steel and Philip W. Green

For Appellee:  Prenovost, Normandin, Bergh & Dawe, Michael G. Dawe and Paula M. Harrelson

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard