Steiner

BACKGROUND

Steiner sued Thexton to obtain specific performance of a real estate purchase agreement. Pursuant to the agreement, Steiner would undertake to obtain a parcel split and develop 10 acres of a 12.29-acre property. The parties contemplated that it would take one to three years for Steiner to subdivide the property. The agreement further

2 provided that Steiner could elect to cancel the agreement at any time before the close of escrow. If the agreement was terminated prior to the close of escrow, Steiner would give Thexton all information and documents Steiner obtained from independent experts and consultants concerning the property. Thexton asserted over 20 affirmative defenses in response to Steiner’s complaint, including the assertion that the agreement was an unenforceable option that lacked consideration. Thexton sought dismissal of the action with prejudice, costs of suit, and attorney’s fees. The trial court permitted SFP to file a complaint in intervention. SFP alleged that Steiner assigned part of his interest in the agreement to SFP, and SFP and Steiner expended large sums to develop the property pursuant to the terms of the agreement. SFP further alleged that…