## Facts

- Jerome Oliver contracted in writing to purchase two tracts of real property (about 71.5 acres) in Cranberry Township, Butler County, Pennsylvania from Larry Ball and related sellers (collectively, the Balls).
- Oliver testified the property was near his home and had features he valued, including timber, a stream, and mineral rights, and that its size created future subdivision and development possibilities.
- Oliver intended to hold the property as a long-term investment and explained that the property’s components (timber, minerals, potential subdivided parcels) could be more valuable than the tract as a single whole.
- The Balls failed to convey the property as required by the contract.
- Oliver sued in the Court of Common Pleas of Butler County for breach of contract, seeking specific performance (and other relief).
- After Oliver presented his evidence, the trial court granted the Balls’ motion for a compulsory nonsuit, reasoning that Oliver had not shown he lacked an adequate remedy at law because he could be compensated with money damages.
- The trial court later denied Oliver’s post-trial request to remove the nonsuit.
- Oliver appealed to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, challenging the trial court’s denial of specific performance based on the “adequate remedy at law” requirement.

## Issues

1. In Pennsylvania, must a buyer seeking specific performance of a real estate sale contract prove that money damages are inadequate, or is specific performance ordinarily available when a seller breaches a contract to convey land?

## Decision

- The Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed the judgment and remanded.
- The court held the trial court erred by treating specific performance as unavailable unless the buyer proved that legal damages were inadequate.
- The court directed that specific performance be awarded on remand (subject to any equitable matters consistent with the opinion), because the case involved a valid land-sale contract and an unexcused failure to convey.

## Legal Principles

- Specific performance is a traditional remedy for breach of a contract to convey real property because land is treated as unique and damages often do not place the buyer in the position promised by the contract.
- A purchaser of real estate is ordinarily entitled to specific performance when the seller breaches a valid contract, unless granting that relief would be contrary to justice based on equitable considerations.
- The buyer’s investment motive, or the fact that the buyer owns other properties, does not by itself defeat the availability of specific performance for a breached land-sale contract.
- On review of a compulsory nonsuit, the appellate court considers the plaintiff’s evidence and all reasonable favorable inferences to determine whether the case should have been allowed to proceed.

## Conclusion

The Superior Court concluded that Pennsylvania law generally allows specific performance to compel conveyance of contracted-for real estate and does not require the buyer to make an added showing that money damages are inadequate; therefore, the trial court’s nonsuit was reversed and the matter was remanded for entry of a decree granting specific performance consistent with the court’s ruling.


Oliver v. Ball, 136 A.3d 162 (2016)