Specific Performance for Property: Three Things to Know

Specific performance for property is a legal remedy available for many real estate disputes. Here, I’ll discuss three things to know about this area of law.

Specific Performance Requires a Party to Fulfill A Contract Duty

A contract is a legally binding, enforceable agreement. What happens when someone breaches a contract? If the other party pursues the matter in court, they can recover damages from the other side. Most of the time, these damages are money. This is the preferred way that courts like to resolve these matters, by simply issuing a judgment for money against the offending party.

Money, however, won’t always solve the problem. Sometimes in a contract dispute, the goal is to get what was actually bargained for. This most commonly occurs with property. Most often, the buyer doesn’t just want money in a contract dispute; the buyer wants the actual sale of the home to occur.

In such a matter, a party can request specific performance. If successful, the court will order the breaching party to sell the property.

A Judge, and Not A Jury, Determines Whether Specific Performance Is Allowed

In law, some matters are determined by a jury, and others, by a judge. Whether or not someone is entitled to specific performance for property is a decision that a judge alone decides.

While specific performance is commonly granted for real estate contract disputes, it is not a strict requirement. A judge does have discretion in granting such relief and may not allow it if the other party acted in bad faith.

Contracts For Real Estate Have Many Forms

Massachusetts, like most states, requires most contracts for real estate to be in writing.

Most of us think of legal contracts as lengthy, typed agreements that lawyers negotiate and draft. However, this isn’t the only way to draft contracts. Courts have found contracts to be created through text messages, email, and other written correspondence.

For this reason, a claim for specific performance for property is not lost simply because a contract is not in a traditional written form. For this reason, those involved in a contract dispute involving property should speak to an experienced attorney to determine if specific performance is a viable option.

Anti-SLAPP: Sherwin Law Firm Succeeds With Special Motion to Dismiss

Last week, I won a dismissal of a claim against my client in a real estate contract dispute, using Massachusetts’s “anti-SLAPP” law. Anti-SLAPP is a highly effective means of dismissing meritless claims aimed at inhibiting one’s right of petition.

“SLAPP” is an acronym for a strategic lawsuit against public participation. These lawsuits are brought to intimidate and harass those exercising their lawful rights under the law. Massachusetts, like many other states, has an anti-SLAPP law created purposely to punish those who pursue such claims.

Case Overview

I represented a client who was involved in a real estate case involving specific performance. The opposing party was seeking a court order against another party, ordering the sale of a home that my client ended up purchasing.

This opposing party brought a claim against my clients for monetary damages, due to a lawsuit that my client previously filed to obtain ownership of the home (which was successful).

In short, this opposing party was trying to punish my client for filing a necessary and viable lawsuit.

What is Anti-SLAPP?

Massachusetts’s anti-SLAPP law was created purposely for a case like this:

In any case in which a party asserts that the civil claims, counterclaims, or cross claims against said party are based on said party’s exercise of its right of petition under the constitution of the United States or of the commonwealth, said party may bring a special motion to dismiss. The court shall advance any such special motion so that it may be heard and determined as expeditiously as possible. The court shall grant such special motion, unless the party against whom such special motion is made shows that: (1) the moving party’s exercise of its right to petition was devoid of any reasonable factual support or any arguable basis in law and (2) the moving party’s acts caused actual injury to the responding party. In making its determination, the court shall consider the pleadings and supporting and opposing affidavits stating the facts upon which the liability or defense is based.

The “right of petition” broadly includes “any written or oral statement made before or submitted to a legislative, executive, or judicial body . . .”, including the filing of a lawsuit. Anti-SLAPP, in short, is intended to punish the pursuit of a legal claim without factual support or any arguable basis in law, aimed solely to harass the opposing party.

A party can invoke the protections of this law through a special motion to dismiss, which must be heard as “expeditiously as possible.” A successful anti-SLAPP motion, importantly, provides the claimant with mandatory attorney fees and costs from the opposing party.

Here, the Court agreed with my argument, and granted my motion to dismiss.

Final Thoughts

I’m incredibly pleased with the outcome of my special motion to dismiss and the availability of anti-SLAPP for protection against baseless lawsuits. The legal process exists to provide readdress for those who have been harmed . . . not to purposely harm others.

If you think anti-SLAPP may apply to you, contact me for a consultation.