D.G. Edward

This addendum addresses the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, which was not formally decided in the court's prior reasons.

The plaintiffs sought the return of a $50,000 deposit for a property purchase, arguing the agreement was invalid due to technicalities, including a lack of initials on an amendment, an uncrossed-out irrevocability clause, and incomplete written terms.

The court rejected these technical arguments, affirming that contract formation relies on an objective test of whether parties reached a meeting of the minds, considering both words and conduct, rather than strict adherence to formalities.

However, due to factual ambiguities and credibility issues arising from conflicting affidavits regarding whether an agreement was reached and the role of a key individual, the court determined that the issues were more properly resolved at trial.

Consequently, the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was dismissed.

The defendant brought a motion for summary judgment on his counterclaim for breach of contract arising from an aborted real estate transaction.

The plaintiffs had sued for the return of their deposit, arguing the agreement of purchase and sale was never finalized because the defendant failed to initial changes regarding chattels.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that conflicting affidavit evidence regarding whether the plaintiffs were informed of the acceptance and whether there was a true meeting of the minds created a genuine issue requiring a trial.