Lee v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.

From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
Revision as of 15:20, October 24, 2011 by Lost Student (talk | contribs) (Created page with "''Lee v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc.'', 552 F.2d 447 (2d. Cir. 1977). '''Facts''': Parties agreed that Defendant would relocate Plaintiff if Plaintiff sold their part in of a...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Lee v. Joseph E. Seagram & Sons, Inc., 552 F.2d 447 (2d. Cir. 1977).

Facts: Parties agreed that Defendant would relocate Plaintiff if Plaintiff sold their part in of a liquor distribution company, but the relocation portion of the agreement was not in writing. Defendant claimed the relocation agreement was too vague to be enforceable.

Issue: Was the relocation agreement part of the contract to sell the distributorship?

Holding: No, that portion of the agreement was too vague and uncertain.

Rule: Two Prong Test:

  1. The parties intended to be bound, and
  2. There is a reasonable basis to determine a remedy.