On February 9, George Jackson and his neighbors, Karen and Steve Devenyn, drafted and signed a document that purports to convey a seventy-nine-acre parcel of land owned by Jackson
On February 9, George Jackson and his neighbors, Karen and Steve Devenyn, drafted and signed a document that purports to convey a seventy-nine-acre parcel of land owned by Jackson. By the terms of the agreement, Jackson wished to reserve a 1.3-acre portion of the parcel. Although the agreement contained a drawing and dimensions of the conveyance, it did not contain a specific description of the parcel. Jackson died on May 8, and his estate refused to honor the agreement. The Devenyns then filed a petition with the probate court to order a conveyance. Based on the parol evidence rule, the estate of Jackson objected to the admission of the witnesses’ testimony that they could point out the specific area based on conversations with Jackson. Explain whether the oral evidence is admissible.
In this case, verbal proof may not be acceptable. A contract that claims to convey holdings may have a sufficient description of the property to comply with the obligations of the law of frauds and may authorize specific accomplishments. A valid agreement to grant land may clearly elucidate about the land. It may be explicitly prohibited to supply the arrangements required to be disclosed in the written agreement through speculations or presumptions deducted from verbal testimony. This written agreement does not sufficiently describe the land it claims to convey and grants an option to purchase.
When a written agreement only states the total enclosure and does not explain the location of the property involved, the requisite regarding the law of frauds for that category may not be fulfilled, and the agreement may be invalid. The current description provides only the total claim and does not give any conviction that the specific area was planned to be granted. This contract is vague and cannot be enforced.