Paul L. Blanton and Cynthia D. Blue-Blanton - Page 3

                                         -3-                                          
               Petitioners lived at 605 Moore Street in Moscow until August           
          1989.  Around January 1, 1989, petitioners rented an office at              
          106 E. Third in Moscow (E. Third property).  Petitioners                    
          occasionally spent the night at the E. Third property.                      
          B.   Petitioners' Purchase and Sale of the Spokane Property                 
               1.   Purchase Agreement                                                
               On March 20, 1989, petitioners signed a residential real               
          estate purchase and sale agreement (purchase agreement) to buy a            
          residence at 529 W. 22d, Spokane, Washington (W. 22d property)              
          for $180,000 from Michael W. Hagan (Hagan).  Petitioners paid               
          Hagan a $5,000 deposit for the W. 22d property.                             
               The purchase agreement stated that petitioners could take              
          possession of the W. 22d property at closing, which the agreement           
          defined as the date on which all documents are recorded and the             
          sale proceeds are available to the seller.                                  
               The purchase agreement stated that closing would occur by              
          June 19, 1989.  On June 17, 1989, petitioners paid Hagan a second           
          $5,000 deposit to extend their purchase agreement for 60 days               
          because Hagan could not convey legal title (for reasons discussed           
          below at paragraph B-3) to the W. 22d property by June 19.                  
               The purchase agreement stated that it was contingent on                
          Hagan's conveying clear title to the W. 22d property to                     
          petitioners, and that if Hagan could not do so, the agreement               
          would be void and Hagan would return petitioners' deposit.                  






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011