McMichael v. Price: Difference between revisions
Verkhovensky (talk | contribs) added Category:Oklahoma state case law using HotCat |
→top: add "use mdy dates" template |
||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Use mdy dates|date=September 2023}} |
|||
[[Image:Sand sorting tower.jpg|thumb|200px|The sand business can be tough.]] |
|||
{{Infobox Court Case |
|||
| name = McMichael v. Price |
|||
| court = [[Supreme Court of Oklahoma]] |
|||
| image = Seal of Oklahoma.svg |
|||
| imagesize = 150 |
|||
| caption = |
|||
| full name = |
|||
| date decided = {{start date|1936|05|05}} |
|||
| citations = |
|||
| docket = 23797 |
|||
| transcripts = |
|||
| judges = Osborne, Michael E. Riley, David Roger Corn, Thomas L. Gibson |
|||
| counsel for plaintiff= |
|||
| plaintiff =Harley T. Price, doing business as Sooner Sand Company |
|||
| defendant = W. M. McMichael |
|||
| prior actions = Appeal from District Court, Tulsa County |
|||
| decision by =Osborne |
|||
| subsequent actions = |
|||
| holding = |
|||
| keywords = |
|||
}} |
|||
'''''McMichael v. Price''''', 58 P.2d 549 (OK 1936), was a case decided by the [[Supreme Court of Oklahoma]] that held that a constraint on discretion was enough to ensure [[consideration|mutuality of obligation]] in a [[requirements contract]].<ref>Ayres, I. & Speidel, R.E. ''Studies in Contract Law, Seventh Edition.'' Foundation Press, New York, NY: 2008, p. 97</ref> |
'''''McMichael v. Price''''', 58 P.2d 549 (OK 1936), was a case decided by the [[Supreme Court of Oklahoma]] that held that a constraint on discretion was enough to ensure [[consideration|mutuality of obligation]] in a [[requirements contract]].<ref>Ayres, I. & Speidel, R.E. ''Studies in Contract Law, Seventh Edition.'' Foundation Press, New York, NY: 2008, p. 97</ref> |
||
==Factual background== |
==Factual background== |
||
The plaintiff Harley T. Price formed a [[contract]] with defendant W.M. McMichael to enter the sand business. Specifically, part of the contract read that: |
The plaintiff Harley T. Price formed a [[contract]] with defendant W.M. McMichael to enter the sand business, Sooner Sand Company on February 25, 1929. Specifically, part of the contract read that: |
||
<blockquote> |
<blockquote>[Price] agrees to purchase and accept from [McMichael] all of the sand ... which [Price] can sell ..."<ref>''McMichael v. Price'', 58 P.2d 549 (OK 1936)</ref></blockquote> |
||
When McMichael refused to sell the sand, Price sued for breach of contract. The trial [[jury]] found for plaintiff Price, and McMichael appealed.<ref>Ayres, p. 96</ref> |
When McMichael refused to sell the sand, Price sued for breach of contract in Tulsa county. The trial [[jury]] found for plaintiff Price, and McMichael appealed.<ref>Ayres, p. 96</ref> |
||
==Decision== |
==Decision== |
||
| Line 14: | Line 35: | ||
==References== |
==References== |
||
{{reflist}} |
{{reflist}} |
||
{{United States contract case law}} |
|||
[[Category:United States contract case law]] |
[[Category:United States contract case law]] |
||
[[Category:1936 in United States case law]] |
[[Category:1936 in United States case law]] |
||
[[Category:Oklahoma state case law]] |
[[Category:Oklahoma state case law]] |
||
[[Category:1936 in Oklahoma]] |
|||
Latest revision as of 02:41, 13 September 2023
| McMichael v. Price | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Supreme Court of Oklahoma |
| Decided | May 5, 1936 |
| Docket nos. | 23797 |
| Defendant | W. M. McMichael |
| Plaintiffs | Harley T. Price, doing business as Sooner Sand Company |
| Case history | |
| Prior actions | Appeal from District Court, Tulsa County |
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | Osborne, Michael E. Riley, David Roger Corn, Thomas L. Gibson |
| Case opinions | |
| Decision by | Osborne |
McMichael v. Price, 58 P.2d 549 (OK 1936), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of Oklahoma that held that a constraint on discretion was enough to ensure mutuality of obligation in a requirements contract.[1]
Factual background
[edit]The plaintiff Harley T. Price formed a contract with defendant W.M. McMichael to enter the sand business, Sooner Sand Company on February 25, 1929. Specifically, part of the contract read that:
[Price] agrees to purchase and accept from [McMichael] all of the sand ... which [Price] can sell ..."[2]
When McMichael refused to sell the sand, Price sued for breach of contract in Tulsa county. The trial jury found for plaintiff Price, and McMichael appealed.[3]
Decision
[edit]The Supreme Court of Oklahoma affirmed the verdict for the plaintiff. McMichael argued that this was an illusory promise because it lacked mutuality of obligation - he contended that the plaintiff could escape all contract liability for simply refusing to sell sand. The court held that the contract did have mutuality of obligation because the contract constrained Price's discretion. Price was required to buy all the sand that he would sell from McMichael, so if he wanted to be in the sand business he was bound to buy from McMichael. The court noted that Price was an experienced sand salesmen, and that while the parties were in business Price was making a profit.[4]