Issue: Appeal on enforceability and severability of a lease-back clause in a real estate sale agreement.
Ruling: Appeal dismissed. The court ruled against allowing appellants to argue a position on appeal that was entirely inconsistent with their stance at trial.
Key Points:
The lease-back clause was found unenforceable and not severable from the sale agreement.
The court emphasized the importance of consistency in legal positions between trial and appeal.
Changing legal strategies on appeal without having raised the issue at trial was deemed an abuse of process.
Amount Awarded: Not applicable as the focus was on contractual enforceability rather than monetary compensation.
