Leeds v FACC - Case Briefs John L. Kachelman, III Leeds v....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Case Briefs John L. Kachelman, III ~ 1 ~ Leeds v. First Allied Connecticut Corp. 521 A.2d 1095 (Court of Chancery of Del., 1986) Type of Action Breach of contract Facts Leeds, owner of Parkview Convalescent Center, was looking for a buyer of Parkview. His ad in national publications was seen and responded to by Sondericker, employee of Glazer. Propositions were sent back and forth, including dialogue as to the desires of Leeds in order to sell Parkview. Sondericker did not understand all the detail Leeds presented, but negotiations continued to proceed. A “letter on intention” was sent for Leeds to sign, claiming authority. Upon receipt of that letter, Glazer then send a “contract” to Leeds which included a brief description of terms. Leeds signed and returned this letter of Nov. 15. There were several details that were not included in the letter (chiefly the consideration of IRB financing), and Leeds sought to discuss them in another meeting thereafter, but that meeting resulted in a disaster due
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 06/15/2009 for the course LAW 577 taught by Professor Staff during the Spring '08 term at University of Arizona- Tucson.

Page1 / 2

Leeds v FACC - Case Briefs John L. Kachelman, III Leeds v....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online