Smargon v. Grand Lodge Partners
Utah Court of Appeals
288 P.3d 1063 (2012)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Prior to contracting with Grand Lodge Partners, LLC (GLP) (defendant) for the purchase of a new resort condominium unit, Daniel Smargon and Audrey Viterbi (the Smargons) (plaintiffs) expressed concern that the unit could be affected by noise from a nearby mechanical room. Despite GLP’s promise to address the issue, the Smargons’ preclosing walk-through inspection of the completed unit was disrupted by noise and vibration from the mechanical room. The Smargons called off the closing. Over the next two weeks, GLP sent the Smargons three letters that (1) vaguely referred to measures GLP had taken or might take to correct the noise problem; (2) downplayed the noise problem’s magnitude; (3) assured the Smargons that the noise problem could be handled as a punch-list item; (4) gave the Smargons no more than two weeks to decide whether to close on the sale, ask GLP to release them from the contract, or forfeit their down payment on the unit; and (5) hinted at GLP’s willingness to sue the Smargons. The Smargons rejected GLP’s deadline as unreasonable and sued GLP for breach of contract. The trial court dismissed GLP’s counterclaim for damages, entered summary judgment for the Smargons, and ordered restitution of the Smargons’ down payment. GLP appealed to the Utah Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Roth, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
