P. ULLENDORFF, APPELLANT,
v.
MARY J. GRAHAM, WIDOW, BELLE F. NEIL, WIDOW, ROSE CONNETT, VIRGINIA NEIL. CONNETT AND G. C. MCCLURE, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's dismissal of a bill of complaint, finding that the evidence supported the complainant's claims regarding a deed placed in escrow and partial payment of the purchase price.
Yes, the evidence sustained the allegations of the bill of complaint regarding the deed, escrow, partial payment, and compliance with terms, with no controlling equities against the complainant.
“The evidence sustains the allegations of the bill of complaint as to the execution of a deed of conveyance to Ullendorff and placing it in escrow and as to the receipt of a part of the purchase by the vendors and a compliance by the purchaser with the terms of the escrow, no controlling equities as against Ullendorff appearing.”
This quote summarizes the court's finding that the complainant met the burden of proof regarding the escrow agreement and purchase.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe complainant, Ullendorff, alleged that he had executed a deed, placed it in escrow, paid part of the purchase price, and complied with the escrow t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Bill Of Complaint cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.-
-The bill of complaint herein sufficiently appears in Ullendorff v. Graham, 80 Fla. 845, 87 South. Rep. 50, where an order sustaining a demurrer and dismissing the bill was reversed.
On demand answers were filed and on testimony taken the chancellor dismissed the bill of complaint. The complainant appealed.
The defendant vendors sought to show the conveyance executed by them was not intended as a completed escrow and that Ullendorff knew the vendors contemplated a conveyance to others.
The evidence sustains the allegations of the bill of complaint as to the execution of a deed of conveyance to Ullendorff and placing it in escrow and as to the receipt of a part of the purchase by the vendors and a compliance by the purchaser with the terms of the escrow, no controlling equities as against Ullendorff appearing.
Reversed.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.