Gaskins v. Byrd

63 So. 824, 66 Fla. 432
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided December 2, 1913·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Whitfield, J.

The appellants brought suit to enforce the specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate. The court dismissed the bill of complaint.

Applications for the enforcement of specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate are addressed to the sound judicial discretion of the chancellor. Such discretion is controlled by the provisions and principles of law and equity applicable to the particular facts and circumstances; and unless it clearly appears that the chancellor has erred in his decree in refusing a specific performance, it will not be disturbed on appeal.

Contracts for the sale of real estate will not be specifically enforced where the particular facts and circumstances clearly show unequality of the contracting parties-by reason of the inexperience and lack of information of one party with reference to the subject-matter as com[434] pared with the superior business qualities and information of the other party, resulting in a contract based on manifestly inadequate consideration the enforcement of which would be inequitable and unjust.

There is ample evidence to sustain the action of the chancellor, in refusing specific performance of the contract, and the decree is affirmed.

Shackleford, C. J., and Taylor, Cockrell and- Hooker, J. J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gaskins v. Byrd, 63 So. 824, 66 Fla. 432 (Fla. 1913).

63 So. 824 (Gaskins v. Byrd) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Delray Beach Whitehouse Apts., Inc. v. Hoffmann
257 So. 2d 550 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1972)
White, Et Ux. v. Cohn
188 So. 581 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1939)
Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. Dorsey
149 So. 759 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)
Dehuy v. Osborne
118 So. 161 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
Rundel v. Gordon
111 So. 386 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
R. E. L. McCaskill Co. v. Dekle
102 So. 252 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1924)
Richardson v. Varn
86 So. 503 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1920)
Murphy v. Hohne
73 Fla. 803 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1917)