Sirillo v. Sabolovich

Ohio Court of Appeals

Sirillo v. Sabolovich

2 Ohio Law. Abs. 650, 1924 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1617

CourtOhio Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 26, 1924

DocketNo. 5482

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 650 (Sirillo v. Sabolovich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sirillo v. Sabolovich, 2 Ohio Law. Abs. 650, 1924 Ohio Misc. LEXIS 1617 (Ohio Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Epitomized Opinion

This was an action for specific performance. The plaintiff exchanged certain property for a house in Cleveland belonging to defendant. As the defendant failed to perform,, the plaintiff filed an action to compel him to do so. An appeal was prosecuted from the decision of the lower court. In granting a decree of specific performance, the Court of Appeals held:

1. It cannot be said from the evidence that the description of the property contained in the agreement was too indefinite to permit specific performance.

2. In a case of renunciation or absolute and unconditional refusal to proceed with the cont.act on the part of one of the contracting parties, the law excuses the absence of tender on the part of the other party to perform, as a court of equity does not require idle acts.

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