Beard v. S/E Joint Venture
581 A.2d 1275 (1990)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a vendor breaches a contract to convey real property for reasons other than a good-faith inability to pass good title, the purchaser is entitled to benefit-of-the-bargain damages. If the purchaser sues for specific performance and that remedy becomes unavailable, those damages may be valued as of the date specific performance was precluded, not the earlier date of the breach.
Facts:
- On March 17, 1986, DeLawrence and Lillian M. Beard entered into a contract with S/E Joint Venture, comprised of Diana Etheridge and Gene Stull, to purchase a lot with a custom-built home for $785,000.
- The contract provided an approximate completion date of November 30, 1986.
- S/E Joint Venture experienced delays in construction, and Stull knew months after the contract's inception that he would be unable to meet the time deadline.
- On March 16, 1987, S/E Joint Venture sent a letter terminating the contract, invoking a clause that allowed cancellation if performance within 365 days was not possible.
- During the ensuing litigation between the parties, S/E Joint Venture filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
- On June 17, 1988, the Bankruptcy Court approved S/E Joint Venture's rejection of the contract with the Beards, which made the remedy of specific performance unavailable.
Procedural Posture:
- The Beards sued S/E Joint Venture and its partners in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County (a trial court), seeking specific performance and, in the alternative, damages for breach of contract.
- The trial court found that the vendors had breached the contract but denied the Beards' claim for 'loss of bargain' damages, finding no evidence of bad faith defined as 'malice, fraud or the like.'
- The trial court awarded the Beards $124,594 in damages, representing their deposit and other out-of-pocket expenses.
- Both parties appealed to the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland (an intermediate appellate court).
- The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling on the issue of damages.
- The Beards (as petitioners) petitioned for a writ of certiorari, which was granted by the Court of Appeals of Maryland (the state's highest court).
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Are purchasers entitled to benefit-of-the-bargain damages, valued as of the date specific performance became unavailable, when a vendor in a rising real estate market breaches a contract to construct and convey realty for reasons other than a good-faith title defect?
Opinions:
Majority - Rodowsky, J.
Yes. When a vendor breaches a contract to convey realty for reasons other than a good-faith inability to convey title, the purchaser is entitled to recover benefit-of-the-bargain damages. The court rejected the trial court's limitation of damages to out-of-pocket expenses, clarifying that the rule from Flureau v. Thornhill, which restricts damages, applies only narrowly to cases where a seller is unable to convey good title despite good-faith efforts. Here, the breach was due to construction delays and a wrongful termination, not a title defect. The court held that a failure to perform for reasons within the vendor's control constitutes 'bad faith' for the purposes of avoiding the Flureau rule, and does not require a showing of malice or fraud. Furthermore, because the Beards had properly sought specific performance, which later became unavailable due to the bankruptcy rejection, the damages should be measured by valuing the property at the time that remedy was lost (June 17, 1988), rather than at the time of the initial breach (March 16, 1987). This approach ensures the purchasers are placed in the position they would have been in had the contract been performed, accounting for the appreciation of the property's value during the litigation.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies Maryland's law on damages for breaches of real estate contracts, particularly in a rising market. It narrowly confines the 'good faith' exception (the Flureau rule), which limits damages to reliance costs, strictly to cases involving title defects. The case establishes an important precedent by allowing the valuation date for benefit-of-the-bargain damages to be moved from the date of breach to the later date when specific performance becomes unavailable. This protects purchasers who pursue equitable remedies and prevents vendors from benefiting from delays and market appreciation after their own breach.
Unlock the full brief for Beard v. S/E Joint Venture