Yee v. Sigal
Kam F. Yee and Siu Long Yee challenge the trial courts nonsuit ruling on their cross-complaint seeking breach of contract damages against Philippe Sigal and Helen C. Sigal. The Yees entered into an agreement to sell their residence to the Sigals, with the Sigals depositing $10,000 in escrow. In an addendum, the Sigals agreed to pay for any needed repairs to the property, including an estimated $2,860 in termite repairs. The addendum also provided that escrow would be cancelled and the Sigals would receive back their deposit if a cloud appeared on title. The escrow company received a $2,860 invoice for repairs from a termite company, and a former prospective buyer recorded a lis pendens against the property. A dispute arose when the Sigals refused to allow the Yees to deduct the invoice amount from the Sigals deposit.
We conclude the trial court properly granted the nonsuit motion on the Yees breach of contract claim. The addendum reflected the parties mutual intent to terminate the contract automatically upon a cloud appearing on the propertys title. The abandonment had the effect of cancelling all of the parties promises, and required the return of the Sigals full deposit. Moreover, the Yees failed to present sufficient evidence the invoice represented money actually due and owing, or that they would suffer damage from the unpaid invoice. Accordingly, Court affirm.
Comments on Yee v. Sigal