Bikram Singh Bal

The Plaintiffs, vendors in an aborted residential real estate sale, moved for summary judgment against the Defendants, purchasers who failed to close the transaction.

The purchasers sought an abatement or extension due to a decrease in appraised value and financing issues, which the vendors refused.

The vendors subsequently re-sold the property at a lower price and claimed damages.

The court granted summary judgment to the Plaintiffs, finding the Defendants had repudiated the Agreement of Purchase and Sale and that the Plaintiffs had made reasonable efforts to mitigate their losses.

Damages were awarded, including the loss on resale, interest on a bridge loan, and legal fees, with the deposit to be applied against the total.

A motion to amend the style of cause to correct a defendant's name was also granted.

The moving parties in a contested estate proceeding sought third-party production from FundEX, a mutual fund dealer where the estate trustee formerly worked as a financial advisor.

The moving parties alleged the estate trustee acted in a conflict of interest by holding dual roles.

FundEX resisted production, arguing Rule 30.10 does not apply to applications.

The court held that because a small claims action had been consolidated with the applications, Rule 30.10 applied.

The court also noted its jurisdiction under Rules 74 and 75 to order third-party production in contested estate matters.

FundEX was ordered to produce its compliance manuals and documents related to a regulatory investigation, but not communications involving the estate trustee, which should be sought from him directly.