Potter v. Musick

Per Curiam. In January 1965, the appellants, William Potter, age 73, and Vannie Potter, his wife, listed for sale their property containing approximately 11J4 acres near Perryville, Cecil County, with a real estate broker for the asking price of $15,500. The realtor showed the property to several prospective purchasers, and on May 11, 1965, showed the property to Arvel B. Musick, the appellee. The appellee discussed the terms of sale with appellant William Potter and on or about May 22, 1965, decided to. purchase the property for the asking price.

On May 28, 1965, the appellees executed the contract which had previously been executed by the appellants on May 24, 1965. The contract permitted the sellers to retain possession for sixty days. On June 26, 1965, appellant Vannie M. Potter notified the appellee, Arvel B. Musick, that the appellants did not intend to go through with the contract. Although the appellees in turn notified appellants, in writing, that they were ready, able, and willing to settle, the appellants persisted in their refusal to- execute the deed.

This suit for specific performance was then filed by the appellees. At the hearing below, the appellant introduced witnesses who testified that the appellant, William Potter, was suffering from mental depression and despondency and that between the dates of May 24, 1965 to and through May 28, 1965, he was not mentally competent to have entered into a binding contract. Two of the appellants’ witnesses were doctors — one a general practitioner, who was the family physician, the other a psychiatrist. The general practitioner had not seen Mr. Potter from April until June 25, 1965, and he testified that although mentally despondent he had lucid intervals.

The psychiatrist testified that much of her information concerning the depressed condition of Mr. Potter came from his son and wife; that she thought his judgment was impaired; that he was confused and depressed; but, “This doesn’t mean that he isn’t correctly oriented.” She felt that evidence of his depression and impairment of judgment was demonstrated by the fact that he