Vagueness And Indefiniteness In Contracts

10 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co., Inc. v. Data Lease Fin. Corp.
  302 So. 2d 404· Fla.· 1974-10-24 ·cited 178×
  Blackhawk and Machata lent their credit to Data Lease to facilitate Data Lease's purchase of bank stock, taking an option to acquire 25% of the shares for consideration tied to "cash-flow benefits" Data Lease would derive from the transaction. The Florida Supreme Court reversed t
• Truly Nolen, Inc. v. Atlas Moving & Storage Warehouses, Inc.
  125 So. 2d 903· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-01-05 ·cited 28×
  Truly Nolen challenges a declaratory decree enforcing an advertising lease agreement with Atlas Moving & Storage. The appellate court reversed the decree, holding that the lease was unenforceable because it was fatally vague regarding the essential subject matter—the advertising
• Edmun Realty Corp. & A. E. Munyer v. Kearns
  158 Fla. 558· Fla.· 1947-01-28 ·cited 24×
  Edmun Realty Corporation and A. E. Munyer appeal a chancellor's denial of their motion to dismiss a bill of complaint seeking specific performance for the sale of real estate. The Florida Supreme Court reverses, holding that the plaintiff's allegations fail to establish an enforc
• Ginsberg Mach. Co., Inc. v. J. & H. Label Processing Corp.
  341 F.2d 825· 2d Cir.· 1965-02-15 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the alleged oral agreement and subsequent letter did not constitute an enforceable contract because they failed to meet the requirements of the New York Statute of Frauds and lacked essential terms.
• Cont'l Bank & Tr. Co. for the Lot Purchasers v. Am. Bonding Co.
  605 F.2d 1049· 8th Cir.· 1979-08-29 ·cited 10×
  The surety is liable on the performance bonds, but the measure of damages awarded by the district court was erroneous and requires redetermination.
• Fincher v. Belk-Sawyer Co.
  127 So. 2d 130· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-02-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that provisions left for future agreement, such as the establishment of certain services and the amount of additional compensation, did not render the entire contract unenforceable because they were not essential to the core agreement.
• Ledford Gregory v. Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  764 F.2d 1437· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the existence of an oral contract, affirming the directed verdict for the defendant.
• D. W. Winkelman Co., Inc. v. Barr
  178 F.2d 341· 6th Cir.· 1949-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the contract was sufficiently definite and enforceable, and that the termination clause did not render it a contract at will under Tennessee law when performance was otherwise satisfactory.
• Anderson & Brown Co. v. Anderson
  161 F.2d 974· 7th Cir.· 1947-05-23 ·cited 2×
  A contract is unenforceable for vagueness and indefiniteness if essential elements, such as price, are not ascertainable with reasonable certainty.
• Real Est. World Fla. Commercial, Inc. v. Gurkin
  943 So. 2d 270· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-11-22
  An oral brokerage agreement is enforceable if it provides a practicable method for determining compensation, even if the final sale price is subject to negotiation.