California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Rodriguez v. Nicoleyson, 2d Civil No. B190289 (Cal. App. 6/20/2007), 2d Civil No. B190289 (Cal. App. 2007):
It is true an escrow that requires the recording of documents cannot close on a day on which the recorder's office is not open. But in the absence of an express term in the agreement that time is of the essence or its necessary implication by reason of the nature of the contract, the court will provide the parties a reasonable time in which to perform. (Fowler v. Ross (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 472, 479-480.) Here the contract did not expressly state that time is of the essence, and there is nothing in the nature of the contract that requires the implication that time is of the essence. Thus it was not necessary to close escrow on February 29, 2004.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.