## Facts

- Donna and Charles Graziano agreed by written contract to sell a condominium unit to J. Daniel Pruitt.
- The unit was in a condominium complex of roughly 250 units and included features described as overlooking woods and a brook and having a rear addition.
- The sellers breached the contract; Pruitt sued seeking specific performance rather than money damages.
- The sellers argued the unit was not unique because it was one of many units in the complex.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Pruitt and ordered the sellers to convey the unit.
- The sellers appealed, contending a factual dispute over the unit’s uniqueness barred summary judgment and that specific performance required proof of uniqueness.

## Issues

1. Whether a purchaser seeking specific performance of a condominium sale contract must present evidence that the unit is “unique.”
2. Whether, given the presumption that real property is unique, an asserted factual dispute about a condominium unit’s uniqueness can defeat summary judgment for specific performance.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment order granting specific performance to Pruitt.
- The court held that a condominium unit is a separate parcel of real property under the Condominium Act.
- The court held that real property is presumptively unique and legal damages are presumptively inadequate for breach of a contract to convey it.
- Because uniqueness is presumed as a matter of law, a factual contest over the unit’s alleged non-uniqueness was immaterial and did not create a genuine issue of material fact.
- The court rejected the sellers’ reliance on prior decisions as distinguishable, including cases involving non-real-property contracts, unusual equitable circumstances, or a seller (rather than purchaser) seeking specific performance.

## Legal Principles

- Under New Jersey’s Condominium Act, each condominium unit constitutes a separate parcel of real property.
- A purchaser may generally compel specific performance of a contract to sell real property.
- For purchaser claims, equity presumes real property is unique and presumes damages at law are inadequate; separate evidentiary proof of uniqueness is not required.
- When uniqueness is presumed as a matter of law, litigating “uniqueness” as a fact question does not, by itself, preclude summary judgment awarding specific performance.

## Conclusion

The court upheld specific performance on summary judgment, concluding that condominium units are real property and that, for a purchaser, uniqueness is presumed as a matter of law, making an asserted factual dispute about uniqueness irrelevant to the availability of specific performance.


Pruitt v. Graziano, 521 A.2d 1313 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1987)