the down payment, despite the fact that the conditions to splitting the lot were not yet satisfied. Plaintiffs refused, as was their right at that time. While the paving requirement was eventually removed by the board due to plaintiffs’ efforts, Hatt served notice of forfeiture on the plaintiffs before that requirement had been satisfied and before he presented the abstract to plaintiffs for inspection. From that point forward, Hatt refused to cooperate with plaintiffs in any way despite their repeated requests. In essence, Hatt breached the contract by anticipatory repudiation. By serving upon plaintiffs the notice of forfeiture, Hatt repudiated the contract. See Williams v. Clark, 417 N.W.2d 247, 250 (Iowa App.1987); accord Bitzes v. Sunset Oaks, Inc., 649 P.2d 66, 70 (Utah 1982) (<HOLDING>); Blue Lakes v. George Gowing, Inc., 464 So.2d
holding that the seller had no noncontractual duty to disclose water damage to armslength buyers of residential real estate holding that seller repudiated a real estate contract where it refused to honor a sale contract and returned buyers down payment after compliance with a city drainage easement added an unforeseen expense to formation of the lot to be sold holding that the validity of a contract for a commission for the sale of real estate is determined by the law of the state where the contract is made holding the real estate sale proceeds holding that an attorney approval clause in a contract for the sale of real estate was a part of that contract and would have to be satisfied for the underlying contract to be enforceable