Shannon v. Gull Lake Ass'n

11 Mich. App. 644
Michigan Court of Appeals·Decided June 10, 1968·No. Docket No. 3,482·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.,

Plaintiff, appeals a judgment of no cause of action for specific performance of an agreement to sell real estate. Two contracts are involved, the first dated July 21, 1961, and the second February 12, 1963. The trial court found that the second contract superseded the first contract, and that plaintiff was not entitled to specific performance of the second contract because of his failure to meet his, contractual obligations , thereunder. A review of the record fails to convince us we would have reached a different result had we sat as the trial court.

Specific performance is not a remedy of right but rests in the sound discretion of the court. Rose v. Gilbert (1948), 320 Mich 455. This record demonstrates no abuse of discretion.

Affirmed, with costs to defendant.

Burns, P. J., and Quinn and Ziem, JJ., concurred.

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

Shannon v. Gull Lake Ass'n, 11 Mich. App. 644 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968).

11 Mich. App. 644 (Shannon v. Gull Lake Ass'n) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Shannon v. GULL LAKE ASSOCIATION
162 N.W.2d 111 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1968)