Supreme Court of Texas

In a suit demanding specific performance of a real estate contract, reversal of grant of specific performance to buyer is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded where: 1) an essential element in obtaining the equitable remedy of specific performance is that the party seeking such relief must plead and prove he is ready, willing, and able to timely perform his obligations under the contract, and the contract at issue here did not alter that requirement; 2) a finding that buyer was ready, willing, and able to perform could not be deemed based on the jury charge as submitted under Rule 279; but 3) buyer was entitled to pursue his claim to the alternate ground of recovery under the purchase contract relating to refund of the earnest money.

Appellate Information

• Argued 10/20/2005
• Decided 10/17/2008
• Published 10/17/2008

Judges

• Justice WALDROP 1 delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Justice HECHT, Justice WAINWRIGHT, Justice BRISTER, and Justice WILLETT joined.

Court

• Supreme Court of Texas

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Craig T. Enoch, Melissa Prentice Lorber, Winstead PC, Austin, James Robert Krause, Lawrence J. Friedman, Jeffrey Thomas Hall, Friedman & Feiger, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, for Petitioner., Douglas Laycock, University of Michigan Law School, Ann Arbor, MI, for Amicus Curiae.


• For Appellees:
  
• Hilaree A. Casada, Hermes Sargent Bates, L.L.P., Julia F. Pendery, Attorney At Law, David W. Shuford, Law Office of David W. Shuford, Daon M. Ward, Godwin Pappas Langley Ronquillo, LLP, Dallas, TX, for Respondent.