Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

GLAZER v. CHANDLER (04/21/64)

April 21, 1964

GLAZER
v.
CHANDLER, APPELLANT.



Appeal, No. 30, Jan. T., 1964, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Delaware County, Sept. T., 1961, No. 149, in case of Herman Glazer v. C. Raymond Chandler and Jean M. Chandler, his wife. Judgment reversed; reargument refused May 22, 1964.

COUNSEL

Joseph A. Damico, Jr., with him Chadwick, Petrikin, Smithers & Ginsburg, for appellants.

Edwin E. Lippincott, II, with him Marvin J. Levin, and Lippincott & Donaldson, and Freedman, Landy and Lorry, for appellee.

Before Bell, C.j., Musmanno, Jones, Cohen, Eagen, O'brien and Roberts, JJ.

Author: Cohen

[ 414 Pa. Page 305]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE COHEN

This appeal challenges the order of the court below denying motions for judgment n.o.v. and a new trial after a verdict for the plaintiff in a trespass action for

[ 414 Pa. Page 306]

    the tort of inducing breach of contract or refusal to deal with third parties.

The facts viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict winner are as follows: Plaintiff Herman Glazer and defendant C. Raymond Chandler are residential builders. They executed an agreement of sale whereby Glazer agreed to purchase some 93 building lots situate in the Borough of Brookhaven (Borough) owned by Chandler and his wife, and certain rights to connect sewers in the Borough for lots other than those described in the agreement. These sewer rights would expire and revert to the Borough after a later date.

The agreement of sale provided that one-half of the purchase price was to be secured by a purchase money mortgage covering 56 lots "payable within a period of two (2) years from the date of settlement" and further provided that each lot would be released from the lien of said mortgage upon payment of $1,000. (Emphasis supplied).

A purchase money mortgage purportedly in accordance with the agreement of sale was executed. However, the mortgage provided that it was payable "at the expiration of two years," and did not provide for a release of each lot upon payment of $1,000. (Emphasis supplied). Glazer made numerous efforts to fully pay the mortgage and have it satisfied, but Chandler refused to satisfy. Even after the two-year period had expired, Chandler continued to refuse to satisfy the mortgage or to release any lot from the lien thereof.

As a result of Chandler's refusal to satisfy the mortgage, Glazer was prevented from receiving settlement proceeds. Further, Glazer was unable to sell the sewer connection permits before they expired and reverted to the Borough, since an ancillary agreement provided that the right to sell the permits could not be exercised "so ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.