Willson v. Taylor

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1981

GUY M. WILLSON,
Plaintiff and Respondent,

CHARLES R. TAYLOR, PHYLLIS A. TAYLOR,
MICHAEL J. TAYLOR, CHRISTINE J. TAYLOR,
MARK R. TAYLOR and TARA A. TAYLOR,
Defendants and Appellants.

Appeal from: District Court of the Tenth Judicial District,
In and for the County of Fergus.
Honorable Jack D. Shanstrom.,Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellants:
Moses Law Firm, Billings, Montana
For Respondent:
Robert L. Johnson and Torger S. Oaas, Lewistown, Montana

Submitted on briefs: May 15, 1981
Decided: September 28, 1981

Filed: SEP 2 8 198

aLz.w g*Y v
Clerk
Mr. J u s t i c e Fred J . Weber d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e C o u r t .

A p p e l l a n t s / d e f e n d a n t s C h a r l e s R. T a y l o r and P h y l l i s A .

T a y l o r , husband and w i f e , and Michael, C h r i s t i n e , Mark and

Tara T a y l o r , minor c h i l d r e n , b r i n g t h i s a p p e a l from two

o r d e r s e n t e r e d i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t of t h e Tenth J u d i c i a l

D i s t r i c t , F e r g u s County. The f i r s t o r d e r , d a t e d A p r i l 11,

1980, d e n i e d t h e d e f e n d a n t s ' motions t o d i s m i s s e a c h of t h e

two c o u n t s of t h e c o m p l a i n t , t h e motions having been made

s e p a r a t e l y by d e f e n d a n t s C h a r l e s and P h y l l i s T a y l o r and by

t h e minor d e f e n d a n t s . The second o r d e r , d a t e d December 1 0 ,

1980, g r a n t e d p a r t i a l summary judgment t o t h e r e s p o n d e n t /

p l a i n t i f f Guy M. W i l l s o n a g a i n s t t h e a d u l t d e f e n d a n t s .

W i l l s o n was g r a n t e d summary judgment on o n l y t h e f i r s t c o u n t

of h i s c o m p l a i n t . The c a s e was p r o p e r l y c e r t i f i e d under Rule

5 4 and t h e r e f o r e , may be b r o u g h t b e f o r e t h i s C o u r t f o r r e v i e w .

The d e f e n d a n t s p r e s e n t t h e f o l l o w i n g i s s u e s :

1. Did t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r i n d e n y i n g t h e d e f e n d a n t s '

v a r i o u s motions t o d i s m i s s t h e c o m p l a i n t ?

2. Did t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t err i n g r a n t i n g summary

judgment on Count I of t h e c o m p l a i n t t o t h e p l a i n t i f f ?

W h o l d t h a t summary judgment was p r o p e r l y g r a n t e d and
e

a f f i r m t h e lower c o u r t .

The p a r t i e s e n t e r e d i n t o a l e a s e agreement w i t h an

option-to-purchase c o v e r i n g r e a l p r o p e r t y l o c a t e d i.n F e r g u s

County. P l a i n t i f f W i l l s o n wants t o e x e r c i s e t h e o p t i o n and

purchase t h e land.

The p a r t i e s e x e c u t e d t h e l e a s e on J u l y 2 , 1 9 7 6 , with a

term e n d i n g J a n u a r y 30, 1982. The l e a s e p r o v i d e s :

"OPTION:

" L e s s e e i s hereby g i v e n an o p t i o n t o p u r c h a s e t h e
s u b j e c t p r o p e r t y upon t h e t e r m s c o n t a i n e d i n t h i s
paragraph. The o p t i o n s h a l l be e x e r c i s a b l e d u r i n g
t h e month of December of any y e a r d u r i n g t h e l i f e
 of t h i s l e a s e . The o p t i o n p r i c e s h a l l b e Three
Hundred Seventy F i v e D o l l a r s ($375.00) p e r a c r e i f
e x e r c i s e d d u r i n g t h e y e a r s 1976, 1977, 1978 o r 1979.
T h e r e a f t e r t h e o p t i o n p r i c e s h a l l be Four Hundred
D o l l a r s ($400.00) p e r a c r e . Lessee s h a l l n o t i f y
L e s s o r of t h e e x e r c i s e of t h e o p t i o n i n w r i t i n g , on
o r b e f o r e t h e 1 0 t h day of December, a d d r e s s e d t o
t h e L e s s o r a t Moore, Montana. The t e r m s of t h e s a l e
s h a l l be twenty-nine p e r c e n t ( 2 9 % ) of t h e o p t i o n
p r i c e t o be p a i d i n t h e month of t h e e x e r c i s e of
t h e o p t i o n , w i t h t h e b a l a n c e of t h e p u r c h a s e p r i c e
t o be p a i d i n t h e n e x t s u c c e e d i n g month. Lessor
a g r e e s t o pay t h e F e d e r a l Land Bank A s s o c i a t i o n of
Lewistown s u f f i c i e n t f u n d s from t h e p u r c h a s e p r i c e
t o o b t a i n a r e l e a s e of any mortgage on t h e s u b j e c t
property. I n a d d i t i o n , Lessor a g r e e s t o provide
t i t l e i n s u r a n c e o r a b s t r a c t s showing m a r k e t a b l e
t i t l e , on o r b e f o r e t h e d a t e t h a t t h e b a l a n c e of
t h e purchase p r i c e i s paid. ...
"OIL AND MINERAL RIGHTS:

" L e s s o r s h a l l r e t a i n a l l e x i s t i n g o i l and m i n e r a l
r i g h t s d u r i n g t h e term of t h i s l e a s e , t o g e t h e r w i t h
a r i g h t of i n g r e s s and e g r e s s t o d e v e l o p such r i g h t s .
I n t h e event t h a t Lessee s h a l l e x e r c i s e h i s o p t i o n ,
t h e n L e s s e e s h a l l r e c e i v e one-half of any o i l and
mineral r i g h t s then e x i s t i n g , together with t h e r i g h t
and power t o l e a s e such o i l and m i n e r a l r i g h t s . "

The l e a s e c o n t a i n s p r o v i s i o n s r e g a r d i n g l a n d d e s c r i p t i o n ,

t e r m , payment of c r o p s h a r e , o p e r a t i o n s , m i n e r a l s , f e n c e s ,

sub-lease, b r e a c h and r e - e n t r y and r i g h t of f i r s t r e f u s a l on

t h e p a r t of t h e l e s s o r .

The p l a i n t i f f f i l e d h i s c o m p l a i n t on December 20, 1979,

r e q u e s t i n g s p e c i f i c performance of t h e s a l e .

The d e f e n d a n t s ' f i r s t i s s u e c o n c e r n s t h e motions t o

d i s m i s s made by them and t h e i r c h i l d r e n . Four s e p a r a t e

m o t i o n s were made: one f o r e a c h c o u n t of t h e c o m p l a i n t by

t h e p a r e n t s and one f o r e a c h c o u n t by t h e minor c h i l d r e n .

A l l of t h e motions were d e n i e d by o r d e r d a t e d A p r i l 11,

I.

A c o m p l a i n t s h o u l d n o t be d i s m i s s e d f o r f a i l u r e t o

s t a t e a c l a i m u n l e s s i t a p p e a r s beyond d o u b t t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f

c a n p r o v e no s e t of f a c t s i n s u p p o r t of h i s c l a i m which

would e n t i t l e him t o r e l i e f . Conley v . Gibson ( 1 9 5 7 ) , 355
U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 1 0 2 , 2 L.Ed.2d 80, 84; F r a u n h o f e r

v. P r i c e (1979), -Mont. -, 594 P.2d 324, 327, 36 St.Rep.
883, 886. A motion t o d i s m i s s under Rule 1 2 ( b ) ( 6 ) , M.R.Civ.P.,

h a s t h e e f f e c t of a d m i t t i n g a l l w e l l - p l e a d e d allegations i n

t h e complaint. I n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e motion, t h e c o m p l a i n t i s

c o n s t r u e d i n t h e l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p l a i n t i f f , and

a l l a l l e g a t i o n s of f a c t c o n t a i n e d t h e r e i n a r e t a k e n a s t r u e .

Commonwealth Edison Co. v . S t a t e ( 1 9 8 0 ) , Mont. , 615

P.2d 847, 849, 37 St.Rep. 1192, 1193, a f f ' d (July 2, 1981),

-U.S. , 1 0 1 S e c t . 2946, 69 L.Ed.2d 884, 49 U.S.L.W.

4957; F r a u n h o f e r v. P r i c e , s u p r a ; Duffy v. B u t t e T e a c h e r s '

Union, Number 332, AFL-CIO ( 1 9 7 5 ) , 168 Mont. 246, 252-253,

541 P.2d 1199, 1202-1203. W e now proceed t o examine t h e

a l l e g a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d i n e a c h c o u n t of t h e c o m p l a i n t .

The f i r s t c o u n t a l l e g e s t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t s owned

c e r t a i n d e s c r i b e d r e a l p r o p e r t y i n F e r g u s County; t h a t t h e

p l a i n t i f f and d e f e n d a n t s e n t e r e d i n t o a w r i t t e n l e a s e of t h e

p r o p e r t y , e x t e n d i n g t o J a n u a r y 30, 1982, under which t h e

p l a i n t i f f i s granted an option t o purchase t h e lands i n

q u e s t i o n ( a copy of t h e l e a s e i s a t t a c h e d t o t h e c o m p l a i n t

and t h e t e r m s t h e r e o f i n c o r p o r a t e d by r e f e r e n c e ) ; and t h a t

t h e p l a i n t i f f h a s been and i s p r e s e n t l y i n p o s s e s s i o n of t h e

l e a s e d l a n d s and t h e l e a s e document was p l a c e d of r e c o r d .

The f i r s t c o u n t t h e n g o e s on t o s t a t e t h e a l l e g a t i o n s a t t a c k e d

by t h e T a y l o r s :

" IV.
" I n t h e month of December, 1979, and b e f o r e t h e 1 0 t h
day t h e r e o f , p l a i n t i f f n o t i f i e d t h e s e d e f e n d a n t s i n
w r i t i n g a d d r e s s e d t o them i n Moore, Montana of p l a i n -
t i f f ' s e x e r c i s e of t h e o p t i o n s e t f o r t h i n t h e l e a s e .
P l a i n t i f f i s r e a d y , w i l l i n g , and a b l e t o perform h i s
o b l i g a t i o n s under t h e o p t i o n and p l a i n t i f f h a s t e n d e r e d
t h e r e q u i r e d down payment. P l a i n t i f f i s informed and
b e l i e v e s , however, t h a t t h e s e d e f e n d a n t s have pur-
p o r t e d t o a l i e n a t e t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n a p o r t i o n of t h e
l a n d s s u b j e c t t o t h e o p t i o n , t h a t t h e y have p l a c e d
a d d i t i o n a l encumbrances upon t h e l a n d , and t h a t t h e y
 have o t h e r w i s e endeavored t o f r u s t r a t e p l a i n t i f f ' s
p u r c h a s e of t h e l a n d under t h e o p t i o n . Plaintiff is
f u r t h e r informed and b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e s e d e f e n d a n t s
i n t e n d t o r e f u s e t o perform t h e i r o b l i g a t i o n s under
t h e o p t i o n . P l a i n t i f f h e r e w i t h o f f e r s t o perform h i s
obligations fully. "

The s u b s t a n c e of p a r a g r a p h I V i s t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f h a s

n o t i f i e d t h e d e f e n d a n t s of t h e e x e r c i s e of t h e o p t i o n , t h e

p l a i n t i f f i s ready t o perform, t h e p l a i n t i f f has tendered

t h e downpayment, t h e d e f e n d a n t s have a l i e n a t e d a p o r t i o n of

t h e l a n d t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n , t h e d e f e n d a n t s have p l a c e d

a d d i t i o n a l encumbrances upon t h e l a n d , t h e d e f e n d a n t s have

o t h e r w i s e endeavored t o f r u s t r a t e p l a i n t i f f ' s p u r c h a s e ,

d e f e n d a n t s i n t e n d t o r e f u s e t o perform, and p l a i n t i f f o f f e r s

t o perform. A l l p l e a d i n g s must be s o c o n s t r u e d a s t o do

substantial justice. Rule 8 ( f ) , M.R.Civ.P. The d e f e n d a n t s

o b j e c t p r i m a r i l y t o t h e "informed and b e l i e v e d " p r e f a c e t o

certain allegations. W e a r e required t o construe t h e complaint

i n t h e l i g h t most f a v o r a b l e t o t h e p l a i n t i f f , F r a u n h o f e r v .

P r i c e , supra. W e hold t h e a l l e g a t i o n s a r e s u f f i c i e n t t o

s t a t e a claim. T h i s C o u r t d o e s n o t f a v o r d i s m i s s a l s on

p l e a d i n g , and r e c o g n i z e s t h a t t h e d e f e n d a n t c a n o b t a i n

a d d i t i o n a l information required. A s s t a t e d i n Tobacco R i v e r

Lbr. Co. v . Yoppe ( 1 9 7 8 ) , 176 Mont. 267, 271, 577 P.2d 855,

"We n o t e a l s o t h a t s h o u l d d e f e n d a n t s d e s i r e any
f u r t h e r d e g r e e of s p e c i f i c i t y , t h e y may o b t a i n t h e
same by u s e of t h e a p p r o p r i a t e d i s c o v e r y d e v i c e s
such as d e p o s i t i o n s , i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s and r e q u e s t s
t o admit. This Court does n o t favor t h e s h o r t
c i r c u i t i n g of l i t i g a t i o n a t t h e i n i t i a l p l e a d i n g
s t a g e u n l e s s a c o m p l a i n t does n o t s t a t e a c a u s e of
a c t i o n under any s e t of f a c t s . . ."
The same a n a l y s i s r e q u i r e s u s t o a f f i r m t h e lower

c o u r t ' s o r d e r a s t o t h e second c o u n t , a l s o . I n t h a t count,

t h e p l a i n t i f f i n c o r p o r a t e s a l l of t h e a l l e g a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d

i n h i s f i r s t c o u n t , and t h e n f u r t h e r a l l e g e s : t h a t i n November
of 1979 t h e p l a i n t i f f n o t i f i e d d e f e n d a n t C h a r l e s R. Taylor

t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f i n t e n d e d t o and would e x e r c i s e t h e o p t i o n

i n December; t h a t n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g such n o t i c e and t h e t e r m s

of t h e o p t i o n , t h e a d u l t d e f e n d a n t s p u r p o r t e d t o convey t o

t h e i r c h i l d r e n a l l of t h e m i n e r a l s under t h e s u b j e c t l a n d s

( a copy of t h e m i n e r a l i n t e r e s t conveyance i s a t t a c h e d t o

t h e c o m p l a i n t and i n c o r p o r a t e d by r e f e r e n c e ) ; t h a t t h e

conveyance was w i t h o u t c o n s i d e r a t i o n and i n c l e a r v i o l a t i o n

of t h e t e r m s of t h e o p t i o n ; and, t h a t i f t h e conveyance i s

n o t a v o i d e d , t h e v a l u e of t h e s u b j e c t l a n d s w i l l be d i m i n i s h e d

i n t h e amount of $51,000 o r more. These a l l e g a t i o n s a r e

s u f f i c i e n t t o s t a t e a claim f o r r e l i e f .

The d e f e n d a n t s a r g u e t h a t t h e c h i l d r e n s h o u l d have been

d i s m i s s e d from c o u n t one i n any e v e n t . W do n o t a g r e e .
e

They a r e n o t p a r t i e s t o t h e l e a s e , s o c o u l d n o t b e a f f e c t e d

by any d e c r e e g r a n t i n g s p e c i f i c performance. I n addition,
t h e f i r s t count i s s p e c i f i c a l l y d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t t h e p a r e n t s ,

a s was r e c o g n i z e d by t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t when i t g r a n t e d

summary judgment on c o u n t one a g a i n s t t h e a d u l t d e f e n d a n t s

only. The D i s t r i c t C o u r t d i d n o t err i n r e f u s i n g t o d i s m i s s

a s t o t h e children; they a r e not p a r t i e s t o t h e f i r s t count,

and t h e y a r e p r o p e r p a r t i e s t o t h e second c o u n t a s t h e

g r a n t e e s named i n t h e m i n e r a l conveyance.

The d e f e n d a n t s a s s e r t t h a t t h e lower c o u r t e r r e d i n

g r a n t i n g summary judgment t o t h e p l a i n t i f f and a g a i n s t t h e

a d u l t d e f e n d a n t s on c o u n t one.

"When m u l t i p l e c l a i m s f o r r e l i e f and m u l t i p l e
p a r t i e s a r e i n v o l v e d i n a n a c t i o n , t h e c o u r t may
d i r e c t t h e e n t r y of a f i n a l judgment a s t o one o r
more, b u t fewer t h a n a l l of t h e c l a i m s o r p a r t i e s
o n l y upon a n e x p r e s s d e c l a r a t i o n t h a t t h e r e i s no
j u s t r e a s o n f o r d e l a y and upon a n e x p r e s s d i r e c t i o n
f o r t h e e n t r y of judgment." Rule 5 4 ( b ) , M.R.Civ.P.
 The c o u r t by judgment d a t e d December 1 0 , 1980, p o i n t e d o u t

t h a t t h e c o u r t had c e r t i f i e d t h a t t h e r e was no j u s t r e a s o n f o r

d e l a y i n t h e e n t r y of f i n a l judgment on t h a t o r d e r . I t was,

t h e r e f o r e , o r d e r e d , a d j u d g e d and d e c r e e d t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f s have

judgment a g a i n s t t h e d e f e n d a n t s t h a t t h e o p t i o n be s p e c i f i c a l l y

performed. I t was a l s o o r d e r e d t h a t s a i d d e f e n d a n t s be r e q u i r e d

t o s e l l and convey t h e l a n d s u b j e c t t h e r e t o t o p l a i n t i f f and t o

e x e c u t e a good and s u f f i c i e n t conveyance t o him on payment by

p l a i n t i f f of t h e amount o f t h e p u r c h a s e p r i c e a l l i n a c c o r d a n c e

w i t h t h e t e r m s and c o n d i t i o n s s e t f o r t h i n s a i d o p t i o n .

T h i s m e e t s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of Rule 54 ( b ) and t h e a p p e a l

i s properly before t h i s Court.

The f o l l o w i n g r u l e s governed t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s

c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h i s motion:

"A p a r t y s e e k i n g t o r e c o v e r upon a c l a i m
may . . .
. . . movewith o r without supporting a f f i d a v i t s f o r
a summary judgment i n h i s f a v o r upon a l l o r any p a r t
thereof." Rule 5 6 ( a ) , M.R.Civ.P.

"The [summary] judgment s o u g h t s h a l l be g r a n t e d
f o r t h w i t h i f t h e p l e a d i n g s , d e p o s i t i o n s , answers
t o i n t e r r o g a t o r i e s , and a d m i s s i o n s on f i l e , t o g e t h e r
w i t h t h e [ s u p p o r t i n g ] a f f i d a v i t s , i f a n y , show t h a t
t h e r e i s no g e n u i n e i s s u e a s t o any m a t e r i a l f a c t
and t h a t t h e moving p a r t y i s e n t i t l e d t o a judgment
a s a m a t t e r of law . . ." Rule 56 ( c ) , M.R.Civ.P.

"When a motion f o r summary judgment i s made and
supported a s provided i n t h i s r u l e , an adverse p a r t y
may n o t rest upon t h e mere a l l e g a t i o n s o r d e n i a l s
of h i s p l e a d i n g , b u t h i s r e s p o n s e , by a f f i d a v i t s o r
a s o t h e r w i s e p r o v i d e d i n t h i s r u l e , must s e t f o r t h
s p e c i f i c f a c t s showing t h a t t h e r e i s a g e n u i n e i s s u e
for trial. I f he d o e s n o t s o r e s p o n d , summary judg-
ment, i f a p p r o p r i a t e , s h a l l be e n t e r e d a g a i n s t him."
Rule 5 6 ( e ) , M.R.Civ.P.

The D i s t r i c t C o u r t had b e f o r e i t a s a r e c o r d on c o u n t

one t h e c o m p l a i n t and answer, twenty r e q u e s t s f o r a d m i s s i o n

s u b m i t t e d t o t h e d e f e n d a n t s by t h e p l a i n t i f f and t h e d e f e n d a n t s 1

answers t h e r e t o , and a n a f f i d a v i t i n s u p p o r t of t h e motion

e x e c u t e d by t h e p l a i n t i f f . The d e f e n d a n t s f a i l e d t o c o n d u c t

any d i s c o v e r y of t h e i r own, and f a i l e d t o f i l e any a f f i d a v i t s
i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e motion f o r summary judgment.

Summary judgment i s a p p r o p r i a t e when t h e moving p a r t y

shows a complete a b s e n c e of any g e n u i n e i s s u e as t o a l l f a c t s

which a r e m a t e r i a l i n l i g h t of t h o s e s u b s t a n t i v e p r i n c i p l e s

which e n t i t l e him t o a judgment as a m a t t e r o f law; and when

t h e d e f e n d a n t s f a i l e d t o come forward w i t h e v i d e n c e of a g e n u i n e

i s s u e of m a t e r i a l f a c t .

The p l e a d i n g s , r e q u e s t s f o r a d m i s s i o n s , and a f f i d a v i t s

e s t a b l i s h e d t h e f o l l o w i n g f a c t s : The l e a s e was e x e c u t e d (de-

f e n d a n t s ' answer t o r e q u e s t no. 1, d a t e d J a n u a r y 1 8 , 1 9 8 0 ) ;

d e f e n d a n t Charl-es R. T a y l o r was s e r v e d w i t h a n o t i c e of t h e

p l a i n t i f f ' s e x e r c i s e of h i s o p t i o n , such s e r v i c e accomplished

a t h i s r e s i d e n c e w i t h i n t h e f i r s t t e n d a y s of December 1979

(answers t o r e q u e s t no. 2 dated January 18, 1980); t h e p l a i n t i f f

a l s o n o t i f i e d t h e d e f e n d a n t s of h i s e x e r c i s e of t h e o p t i o n

w i t h i n t h e f i r s t t e n d a y s o f December 1979, by w r i t i n g a d d r e s s e d

t o them a t t h e i r a d d r e s s i n Moore, Montana ( a f f i d a v i t of Guy M .

W i l l s o n d a t e d J u n e 30, 1 9 8 0 ) ; t h e a d u l t d e f e n d a n t s were r e s i d i n g

t o g e t h e r i n Moore d u r i n g t h a t time (answer t o r e q u e s t no. 6 ) ;

t h e p l a i n t i f f t e n d e r e d t h e r e q u i r e d downpayment w i t h i n t h e t i m e

s p e c i f i e d i n t h e o p t i o n ( a f f i d a v i t o f J u n e 30, 1980) ; t h e de-

f e n d a n t s e x e c u t e d a new mortgage on t h e s u b j e c t l a n d s on

December 1 0 , 1979, i n f a v o r of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s of America,

t h r o u g h t h e FHA, t o s e c u r e t h e repayment of a l o a n i n t h e amount

of $190,000, which mortgage was u n r e l e a s e d a s of J a n u a r y 30,

1980 (answers t o r e q u e s t s no. 1 4 and no. 1 5 , d a t e d J a n u a r y 30,

1 9 8 0 ) ; t h e d e f e n d a n t s e x e c u t e d a n a d d i t i o n a l mortgage on t h e

l a n d s i n f a v o r of Northwestern Bank of Lewistown t o s e c u r e

repayment of a l o a n i n t h e amount of $126,800 which was u n r e -

l e a s e d a s of J a n u a r y 30, 1980 (answers t o r e q u e s t s no. 16 and no.

1 7 , d a t e d J a n u a r y 30, 1 9 8 0 ) ; t h e d e f e n d a n t s conveyed m i n e r a l
i n t e r e s t s i n t h e l a n d t o t h e i r c h i l d r e n a s a g i f t and w i t h o u t

c o n s i d e r a t i o n by q u i t c l a i m deed d a t e d November 30, 1979 (answers

t o r e q u e s t no. 5 of J a n u a r y 1 8 , 1 9 8 0 ) ; t h e p l a i n t i f f p a i d t h e

b a l a n c e of t h e p u r c h a s e p r i c e i n t h e amount of $90,652.80 i n t o

c o u r t by o r d e r d a t e d A p r i l 11, 1980; and, none of t h e d e f e n d a n t s

e v e r a d v i s e d t h e p l a i n t i f f t h a t h i s t e n d e r of t h e downpayment

w a s d e f e c t i v e (answer t o r e q u e s t no. 1 9 , d a t e d J a n u a r y 30, 1 9 8 0 ) .

The d e f e n d a n t s a s s e r t t h a t t h e i s s u e s whether t h e

p l a i n t i f f p r o p e r l y n o t i f i e d them of h i s e x e r c i s e of t h e

o p t i o n and whether t h e t e n d e r was s u f f i c i e n t t o r a i s e m a t e r i a l

i s s u e s of f a c t . T h e i r answers t o t h e r e q u e s t s f o r a d m i s s i o n s

s t a t e t h a t t h e postmarks on t h e l e t t e r s a r e a l l i l l e g i b l e ,

s o t h a t t h e y a r e n o t s u r e of t h e d a t e s on which t h e y r e c e i v e d

n o t i c e ; a l s o , t h a t n o t i c e was s e r v e d o n l y on C h a r l e s R .

T a y l o r and was n o t s e r v e d on P h y l l i s A. T a y l o r . However,

t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s a f f i d a v i t of June 30, 1980, s t a t e s t h a t h e

d i d make t i m e l y n o t i f i c a t i o n and d i d t e n d e r t h e downpayment

properly. " ' [Tlhe opposing p a r t y ' s f a c t s must be m a t e r i a l

and of a s u b s t a n t i a l n a t u r e , n o t f a n c i f u l , f r i v o l o u s , gauzy,

nor merely s u s p i c i o u s . ' " Harland v . Anderson, s u p r a . The

d e f e n d a n t s f a i l e d t o come forward w i t h t h e i r own a f f i d a v i t s

i n d i s p u t e of p l a i n t i f f ' s averments. For t h a t r e a s o n ,

summary judgment on c o u n t one w a s p r o p e r l y g r a n t e d .

W e a f f i r m t h e judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t .

W Concur:
e

% -4 d,psu-
Chief J u s t i c e