Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Sedmak v. Charlie’s Chevrolet, Inc. case brief

Sedmak v. Charlie’s Chevrolet, Inc. case brief summary
622 S.W.2d 694 (1981)


CASE SYNOPSIS
Defendant appealed an order of the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis (Missouri) for specific performance in a contract case.

CASE FACTS
Plaintiffs sued defendant on a contract for the purchase of a car. The trial court ordered defendant to specifically perform on the contract. Defendant contended that (1) the existence of an oral contract was not supported by the credible evidence; (2) if an oral contract existed, it was unenforceable because of the Statute of Frauds; and (3) specific performance was an improper remedy because plaintiffs did not show their legal remedies were inadequate.

DISCUSSION

  • The court affirmed, holding that failure to specify the selling price did not render the contract void or voidable. 
  • As long as the parties agreed to a method by which the price was to be determined and as long as the price could be ascertained at the time of performance, the price requirement for a valid and enforceable contract was satisfied. 
  • The court held that because there was no dispute as to quantity, part payment for a single indivisible commercial unit removed the oral contract from the Statute of Frauds. 
  • The court held further that plaintiffs had no adequate remedy at law and, thus, were entitled to specific performance.

CONCLUSION
The court affirmed, holding that (1) failure to specify the selling price did not render the contract void or voidable; (2) because there was no dispute as to quantity, part payment for a single indivisible commercial unit removed the oral contract from the Statute of Frauds; and (3) plaintiffs had no adequate remedy at law and, thus, were entitled to specific performance.


Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Contract Law

Shop for Law School Course Materials.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.