In Best v. Miranda, an opinion issued by the Court of Appeals in Phoenix on March 15, 2012, the Court ruled in favor of Art Miranda, the owner of a parcel of property, in a lawsuit brought by Greg Best the holder of an option. The Court ruled that Best’s attempt to exercise the option failed because he did not place the full purchase price into escrow, as the option required. Best had given Miranda notice of his intent to exercise the option, which Miranda ignored. The option required Best to place $165,000 into escrow prior to 11:00 pm on March 31, 2005. The Court rejected Best’s argument that the parties’ had an oral agreement allowing the option to be exercised by notifying Miranda of his intent to exercise the option. Such an agreement would need to be in writing as options on land purchases must be in writing to satisfy the Statute of Frauds. The Court rejected other, more spurious arguments by Best, but ultimately rejected Miranda’s request for attorneys fees on the grounds that Miranda’s attorney had not given them a legal basis for the award. I think there was one, but it is easy to simply cite the Appellate Rule for fee award, which is only procedural and not substantive.