{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

Toys v. Burlington

Toys v. Burlington - to Toys stating that the lease had...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Page: 254 Class Notes Case: Court / Date: Judge: Facts: Issue: Holding: Rule: Toys, Inc. V. Burlington Ct. of App. Vt. (1990) J. Dooley Burlington entered a 5 yr lease with Toys Inc. The lease gave Toys an option to renew for an additional 5 years as long as 1 year notice of intent to renew was given. Toys gave sufficient notice of intent to renew, but did not agree to rental rate. Toys later moved due to lack of agreement in rental rate and subsequently sued Burlington for breach of contract. Burlington argued that by not accepting the prevailing rate, Toys had allowed the renewal option to lapse. Trial ct. gave summary judgement
Background image of page 1

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: to Toys stating that the lease had created a binding option. Burlington appealed claiming the option was too indefinite. Ct. of App. Whether the option agreement contains all material and essential terms to be incorporated in the subsequent document. Even though the option contract did not contain a fixed price at which the option could be exercised, there was a reliable method for calculating the price. All material and essential terms of an option agreement have to be set, or there must be a reliable method of determining any such terms stated in the contract for the option to be enforceable....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}