Brandolino v. Lindsay

Rule of Law:

A plaintiff who sues for specific performance of a real estate contract and, in the alternative, for damages is not precluded from recovering damages for a bad-faith breach if specific performance is denied. Filing a notice of lis pendens does not constitute an irrevocable election of the specific performance remedy.

Facts:

• Newton E. Lindsay owned an undivided one-half interest in a forty-acre parcel of land.
• On May 18, 1964, Lindsay signed escrow instructions to sell the entire forty acres to Dr. Brandolino and Mr. High for $50,000.
• Before signing the instructions, Lindsay had them reviewed and approved in writing by his attorney.
• On May 21, 1964, Lindsay instructed the escrow holder to cancel the transaction.
• When asked for his reason, Lindsay stated that he could 'get twice as much' for the property.
• Brandolino and High refused to cancel the escrow and repeatedly requested that Lindsay complete the sale, but he refused.

Procedural Posture:

• Plaintiffs Brandolino and High filed an action against defendant Lindsay in the trial court.
• The first amended complaint sought specific performance of the sales agreement or, in the alternative, $25,000 in damages for breach of contract.
• Plaintiffs also recorded a Notice of Lis Pendens against the subject property.
• During the trial, after evidence established the property's value was significantly higher than the contract price, the trial judge indicated that specific performance would be denied.
• In response, plaintiffs' counsel stated that they would abandon the cause of action for specific performance and proceed on the claim for damages.
• The trial court denied specific performance but found Lindsay acted in bad faith and entered a judgment awarding plaintiffs $25,000 in damages.
• Defendant Lindsay, as the appellant, appealed the judgment to the intermediate appellate court.