Warning
Info
- - tl;dr
- - ICRA
- - Facts & Holding
- - DeepDive
0 0
Delaware Court of Chancery - 316 A.2d 573
Tags: Contracts, Breach, Remedies, Specific performance
tl;dr:
Tenants in a building built by Defendant allege many construction defects. As a condition of their contract, Defendant agreed to list all incomplete construction elements and finish them in a timely manner. Defendant did not.Video Summary
Case Summary
In the 1973 case Ryan v. Ocean Twelve, Inc., the Delaware Court of Chancery resolved a contract dispute between a group of condo owners and a developer. Multiple owners, including John E. Ryan, sued the developer, Ocean Twelve, Inc., for failing to complete construction work on their condos and to address defects in the units, such as issues with the air conditioning, roof, appliances, sewage system, driveway, and seawall. They argued that Ocean Twelve, Inc. had promised to fix these problems and sought specific performance of the contract, which means that the developer would be required to fulfill its obligations.
The court decided not to grant specific performance in this case due to the intricate circumstances and the varying scope, length, and type of work required to address each owner's allegations, given that each claim presented a distinct issue.
The court went on to say that effective enforcement by the Court under the circumstances would be impractical, and, likely to not actually happen. The court granted Ocean Twelve's motion to dismiss, subject to the right of the Plaintiffs to transfer their action to the Superior Court, if they so desire so that they could still pursue monetary damages.
DeepDiveHighlight a legal term to see the definition
The Plaintiffs, owners of residential units in Ocean Eight Condominium, allege that the Defendant, Ocean Twelve, Inc., did not complete all construction work on the units at the time of transfer. The Plaintiffs were induced to proceed with final settlement based on the Defendant's representation that a list of deficiencies would be compiled for each unit and that the incomplete work would be completed in a timely manner. The Plaintiffs allege that certain warranties have been breached by the Defendant and that the incomplete work set forth on various lists has not been finished and defects have not been corrected. The Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is based on the argument that the Plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law. The Plaintiffs complain of several issues, including a defective air conditioning system, a faulty central sewage system, and a seawall that was not properly secured to the pilings.
LSD+ Case Briefs
Features
- DeepDive for detailed case analysis
- Over 50,000 existing case briefs
- Instant briefs for another 6,000,000 cases
- Highlight dictionary for legal term definitions
- Social learning with chat and high points
Over 50,000 Cases Briefed
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
14-Day Free Trial
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Integrated Legal Dictionary
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Brief anything. Instantly.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Social Learning with Chat and High Points
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Real-Time Brief Feedback
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.