V. [§ 2.21] Specific Performance

JurisdictionMaryland

V. [§ 2.21] SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE

John Smith contracted with George Harris to purchase Harris's home in the prestigious residential area known as Blue Vista Harbor. Harris notified Smith a few days before settlement that he had decided not to sell his home. Smith demanded that Harris attend settlement and perform under the terms of the Contract of Sale. Harris, however, refused to do so. Smith sued Harris for specific performance.

COMPLAINT


Specific Performance


John Smith (hereinafter "Smith"), Plaintiff, by his attorneys, Reza P. Farhad and Farhad & Farhad, P.A., sues George Harris (hereinafter "Harris"), Defendant, and states:
1. Plaintiff Smith is a resident of Baltimore City, Maryland.
2. Defendant Harris is a resident of Baltimore City, Maryland.
3. On or about January 1, 2021, Smith decided to purchase a residence in the prestigious residential area known as Blue Vista Harbor, located in Baltimore City, Maryland.
4. After waiting two years for a home to become available in the aforesaid neighborhood, Smith contacted Harris, who expressed a desire to sell to Smith his home located in Blue Vista Harbor. Harris stated that he planned to retire and move to Florida.
5. On July 1, 2021 the parties entered into a valid and enforceable Contract of Sale for the purchase by Smith of Harris's residence (hereinafter "the Property"), located at 3207 Canton Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland. A copy of the Contract of Sale is attached hereto and incorporated as Exhibit 1. The Deed to the Property is recorded among the Land Records for Baltimore City at Liber 2050, Folio 240. A copy of the Deed is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. Settlement was scheduled for September 8, 2021.
6. On September 3, 2021, Harris notified Smith that "the sale was off," because Harris decided not to retire and move to Florida, but to remain in his home for the duration of his life.
7. On September 4, 2021, Smith demanded that Harris attend settlement and deliver the Deed to the Property pursuant to the Contract of Sale.
8. At all times relevant hereto, Smith was ready, willing and able to perform under the terms of the Contract of Sale.
9. Notwithstanding Smith's demand, Harris failed to attend the settlement and deliver the Deed and take the necessary action to satisfactorily perform under the Contract of Sale.
10. Harris breached the Contract of Sale by failing to attend settlement and deliver the Deed to the Property to Smith.
11. Smith has no adequate remedy at law.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Smith
...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT