Lee v. Bass, 215 S.W.3d 283 (2007)

Citation: Lee v. Bass, 215 S.W.3d 283 (2007)
Parent Document: Lee v. Bass, 215 S.W.3d 283 (2007)
Jurisdiction: Missouri (state)
Effective Date: 2007-02-20
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1615659/lee-v-bass/ ↗

Full Text

874 chars

The contractual issues were made more difficult for the trial court because the parties failed to cite pertinent authority and principles of law to guide the court. Also, the parties did not always seem to recognize the significance of the fact that there were two versions of the lease-option agreement at trial, with slight but material differences. The contract produced by plaintiffs, a photostatic copy, indicated that the closing of the transaction was to take place “0” days after the exercise of the option; while the original contract produced by the Basses, and identified by Susan Bass (the drafter) as the original, left the closing of the transaction open-ended. The evidence showed, however, that the original lease-option contract produced by the Basses, and not the copy of the contract produced by the Lees, was the operative copy for the court to construe.

Other Sections in This Document (73)

Full Text