Case 10-2 - to sell the items to Plaintiff, citing a house...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Catherine Reeves Case 10-2 Citation Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, INC. Supreme Court of Minneapolis, 1957. 251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 Facts Defendant ran two newspaper advertisements, one stating that Defendant would sell three fur coats, valued at $100.00 a piece, first come, first served, and the other, stating that Defendant would sell three fur stoles, valued between $89.00 and $139.50 for one dollar a piece. Plaintiff arrived first on both occasions, and presented $3.00. Defendant refused
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: to sell the items to Plaintiff, citing a house rule which limited the bargains to women. Issue Did Defendants advertisement constitute an offer? Decision Yes. Reason The advertisement clearly stated that Defendant would sell the fur garments at a definite price to the person who came first. Plaintiff arrived first, thus, accepted the offer. The house rule was not mentioned in the advertisement. While offers can be modified, one cannot, after acceptance, impose new, arbitrary conditions....
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 03/01/2012 for the course LAW 101 taught by Professor Roman during the Spring '11 term at Auburn University.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online