Connection lost
Server error
HICKEY v. GREEN Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Plaintiffs orally agreed to buy land, gave a deposit, and sold their home in reliance. Defendant seller reneged. Court found reliance could overcome the Statute of Frauds, potentially warranting specific performance.
Legal Significance: Adopts Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 129, allowing specific performance of an oral land contract if detrimental reliance makes non-enforcement unjust, even without traditional part performance elements like possession or improvements.
HICKEY v. GREEN Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Defendant, Mrs. Green, orally agreed to sell a parcel of land (Lot S) to plaintiffs, the Hickeys, for $15,000. Hickey gave Green a $500 deposit check, which Green retained but did not cash or endorse, and the payee line was left blank. The check noted the deposit was “Subject to Variance,” a condition later found unnecessary. Hickey informed Green of his intent to sell his current home and build on Lot S. Relying on this oral agreement, the Hickeys advertised their home and, within ten days, entered into a binding agreement to sell it, accepting a deposit. Subsequently, Green informed Hickey she would not sell Lot S to him, having received a higher offer of $16,000 from another party. Hickey offered to meet the $16,000 price, but Green refused. The Hickeys sued for specific performance. Green asserted the Statute of Frauds (G.L.c. 259, § 1) as a defense, as there was no sufficient written memorandum of the sale. The trial court granted specific performance.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: May a party obtain specific performance of an oral contract for the sale of land, notwithstanding the Statute of Frauds, where that party reasonably relied on the contract and the other party’s continued assent, and so changed position that injustice can only be avoided by specific enforcement?
Yes, specific performance may be granted under such circumstances. The court vacated Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident,
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
May a party obtain specific performance of an oral contract for the sale of land, notwithstanding the Statute of Frauds, where that party reasonably relied on the contract and the other party’s continued assent, and so changed position that injustice can only be avoided by specific enforcement?
Conclusion
This case is significant for formally adopting the Restatement (Second) of Contracts Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo co
Legal Rule
A contract for the transfer of an interest in land may be Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in c
Legal Analysis
The court explicitly adopted the rule from Restatement (Second) of Contracts § Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- An oral contract for the sale of land can be enforced