Hunt v. Estate of Hunt
2011 Mo. App. LEXIS 1165
Mo. Ct. App.2011Background
- 1992 contract for deed to sell lake house for $35,000 with 10% interest over 180 months; monthly principal/interest payment $376.13; Lee, stepson, to pay taxes and insurance; time is of the essence clause allowing forfeiture and conversion to a month-to-month tenancy at $375 rent if Lee is 60 days late.
- Lee paid Contract payments through April 2003; May–June 2003 payments not made and July 2003 payment overdue beyond 60 days; Anna sent notice July 17, 2003 declaring forfeiture and converting to rent
- Lee paid $1,219.40 on July 21, 2003 (covering May–July rent plus excess); Anna applied $1.13 toward electric bill and treated subsequent August payment as rent, not purchase payment
- After forfeiture, Lee did not pay premiums for insurance or real estate taxes; Anna paid those items; Lee continued renting until July 2005, then vacated after Anna advised sale of property
- Lee filed January 2008 suit against Estate asserting breach of contract, specific performance, unjust enrichment, quantum meruit, and conversion; Estate counterclaimed for rent; bench trial resulted in judgment for Estate on Lee’s claims and for Lee on the counterclaim; Lee appeals
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract | Lee; Anna allowed cure pre-forfeiture | Estate; forfeiture effective, no cure | Court affirmed; no cure allowed; forfeiture valid before vacate order |
| Specific performance | Lee entitled to specific performance due to alleged waiver/eq. redemption | Waiver not proven; tender insufficient | Court affirmed; no sufficient tender or equitable basis for specific performance |
| Unjust enrichment | Lee conferred benefits (payments, improvements) | Benefits were contract-based or not unjustly retained | Court affirmed; no unjust enrichment because benefits either contract-based or not unjustly retained |
| Quantum meruit | Lee provided improvements; should be compensated | No proven benefit or reasonable value attributable to Lee | Court affirmed; no recoverable quantum meruit |
| Conversion | Lee had right to possession of personal property | No right to possess after forfeiture; property remained with Anna | Court affirmed; no conversion due to lack of right to possession post-forfeiture |
Key Cases Cited
- Murphy v. Carron, 536 S.W.2d 30 (Mo. banc 1976) (standard for affirming on any cognizable theory)
- Long v. Smith, 776 S.W.2d 409 (Mo. App. 1989) (forfeiture and equity in contracts for deed; discretion of court)
- Kassebaum v. Kassebaum, 42 S.W.3d 685 (Mo. App. 2001) (equitable redemption; tender requirements; burden on movant)
- Four Seasons Lakesites, Inc. v. HRS Props., Inc., 317 S.W.3d 193 (Mo. App. 2010) (tender and waiver principles in specific performance context)
- Randolph v. Ellis, 144 S.W. 483 (Mo. 1912) (long-continued conduct may waive forfeiture provisions)
- Howard v. Turnbull, 316 S.W.3d 431 (Mo. App. 2010) (elements of unjust enrichment; benefits and unjust retention)