Singh

Singh v. Reedy CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 24, 2024C096860California1,982 words

Opinion

Opinion

Feinberg, J.

BACKGROUND

I. In November 2018, the Reedys listed for sale real property located in Lathrop. In December 2018, Singh tendered an offer on the property using a “California Residential Purchase Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions” form contract. The Reedys presented a counteroffer, and Singh accepted. Singh deposited the required funds in escrow, but the Reedys did not sign the escrow documents. Singh demanded specific performance of the written purchase contract, and the parties proceeded to arbitration. In an October 2020 interim arbitration award, the arbitrator concluded that Singh was entitled to specific performance of the agreement. The arbitrator considered the Reedys’ argument that the contract did not disclose that a December 2015 commercial lease between the Reedys and Jeff Reedy’s company, Reedy Mechanical, Inc., encumbered the property and that the terms of the sale contract were therefore too uncertain to support the remedy of specific performance. The arbitrator found that the Reedys had failed to disclose the existence of the lease and concluded that they could not “benefit from their own failure to disclose [the] lease, by using that failure of their own making…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.