FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W185511892> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W185511892 endingPage "1198" @default.
• W185511892 startingPage "1187" @default.
• W185511892 abstract "Contracts courses are notoriously traditional, with Hadley suing Baxendale (1) year after year and William E. Story, Sr., perpetually promising William E. Story, Jr., $5000 to refrain from drinking, smoking, swearing, or gambling until he is twenty-one. (2) One of the few modern cases to have broken into the canon--or, I should say, one of the few modern cases to have broken in that does not relate to computers, computer software, or deals in cyberspace--is Judge Posner's opinion in Market Street Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Frey, (3) written in 1991. It is treated as a principal case on performance in good faith in the Fuller and Eisenberg casebook (4) and as an extended squib in Macneil and Gudel. (5) Perhaps more definitive of its having reached the pantheon of contracts cases is its inclusion for substantial discussion in Professor Marvin Chirelstein's Concepts and Case Analysis in the Law of Contracts (that favorite extra reading of contracts students), (6) where it is one of only eight cited cases decided since 1990. (7) And I include the case in my own materials. (8) I teach it with care, because it is so clear and so intelligent, but also, I confess, because I think it leaves a lot yet to be said. Even if one accepts the approach the opinion embraces, it does not, in my view, reach the right result, and the approach itself leaves out important considerations recognized elsewhere in Judge Posner's writings. Indeed, I wonder whether Judge Posner himself would reach the same result were he to have the chance to write the opinion again. Market Street Associates, assignee of J.C. Penney, sued for specific performance of a contract to convey a shopping center owned by General Electric Pension Trust (of which Dale Frey, the named defendant, was a trustee). Judge Posner's opinion describes the relevant contract terms very clearly: In 1968, J.C. Penney Company, the retail chain, entered into a sale and leaseback arrangement with General Electric Pension Trust in order to finance Penney's growth. Under the arrangement Penney sold properties to the pension trust which the trust then leased back to Penney for a term of 25 years. Paragraph 34 of the lease entitles the lessee to request Lessor [the pension trust] to finance the costs and expenses of construction of additional Improvements upon the Premises, provided the amount of the costs and expenses is at least $250,000. Upon receiving the request, the pension trust agrees to give reasonable consideration to providing the financing of such additional Improvements and Lessor and Lessee shall negotiate in good faith concerning the construction of such Improvements and the financing by Lessor of such costs and expenses. Paragraph 34 goes on to provide that, should the negotiations fail, the lessee shall be entitled to repurchase the property at a price roughly equal to the price at which Penney sold it to the pension trust in the first place, plus 6 percent a year for each year since the original purchase. (9) Market Street Associates claimed that in 1988 it requested financing to build a new store on the premises, was turned down, and therefore was entitled to repurchase the property by the terms of paragraph 34. The pension trust refused to sell, from which, as the case says, we may infer that the property was now worth more than its original price plus accumulated six percent increases. (10) Presumably paragraph 34 was written because, once Penney sold the shopping center, it lost the collateral it could mortgage to finance the center's future development, and, indeed, the underlying facts were that Market Street Associates had tried first to get financing for the project elsewhere but was refused for lack of available security. But the point in dispute was not whether the proposed project qualified for financing under the terms of the contract, nor whether the parties had negotiated in good faith. …" @default.
• W185511892 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W185511892 creator A5010251774 @default.
• W185511892 date "2007-03-01" @default.
• W185511892 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W185511892 title "Good faith in contract performance: Market street Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Frey" @default.
• W185511892 hasPublicationYear "2007" @default.
• W185511892 type Work @default.
• W185511892 sameAs 185511892 @default.
• W185511892 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W185511892 countsByYear W1855118922012 @default.
• W185511892 countsByYear W1855118922021 @default.
• W185511892 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W185511892 hasAuthorship W185511892A5010251774 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C110875604 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C136764020 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C2777134139 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C2777957886 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C2778692574 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C2780573756 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C2781241145 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C41008148 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C554936623 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C71750763 @default.
• W185511892 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C110875604 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C111472728 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C136764020 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C138885662 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C144024400 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C17744445 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C199539241 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C27206212 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C2777134139 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C2777957886 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C2778692574 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C2780573756 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C2781241145 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C41008148 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C554936623 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C71750763 @default.
• W185511892 hasConceptScore W185511892C97460637 @default.
• W185511892 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W185511892 hasLocation W1855118921 @default.
• W185511892 hasOpenAccess W185511892 @default.
• W185511892 hasPrimaryLocation W1855118921 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W1204241306 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W129040843 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W137616927 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W1513389580 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2048373929 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2068806255 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2097112775 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2131142772 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W217201889 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2272707699 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2339100883 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2607223960 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W2607234928 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W283195932 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W304564813 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W320421949 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W3829152 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W614914634 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W836300339 @default.
• W185511892 hasRelatedWork W3125079893 @default.
• W185511892 hasVolume "120" @default.
• W185511892 isParatext "false" @default.
• W185511892 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W185511892 magId "185511892" @default.
• W185511892 workType "article" @default.