If a buyer defaults on a contract to purchase real property, which of these can the seller NOT pursue?

In a situation where a buyer defaults on a contract to purchase real property, the seller has several potential remedies that they can pursue to seek compensation or enforcement. However, suing for assignment is not among these options.

The concept of assignment in real estate usually refers to the transfer of rights or obligations under a contract. When a buyer defaults, the seller is primarily concerned with seeking recompense for the breach of contract rather than assigning or transferring rights to another party. Legal remedies typically involve either seeking monetary damages for losses incurred due to the default, enforcing the terms of the contract through specific performance (which compels the buyer to complete the purchase), or retaining the deposit as liquidated damages depending on the terms of the contract.

Since suing for assignment does not directly address the consequences of the buyer's default on the purchase and does not seek to resolve the seller's immediate interests or losses, it is not a viable option available to the seller in this particular situation.