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

983 chars

Although those portions of the contract — arguably the most crucial portions for this case — were clear and unambiguous, the contract is also superficially (at least) ambiguous as to whether Rex Lee’s monthly payments were rental payments or assumption payments. Paragraph 1 refers to Rex Lee making rent payments. In contrast, in paragraph 17 (in the sentence that begins, “If any default is made in the payment of rent ... ”), the words “of rent” are scratched out. Paragraph 17 is consistent with the notion that the parties were not considering the payments to be rent payments at that time, but were considering the payments to be mortgage assumption payments because Rex Lee had already exercised his option. Perhaps the parties were afraid to acknowledge within the document itself that Rex Lee had actually exercised his option, for fear that the contract would not provide the same degree of protection against the invocation of the due-on-sale clause. Therefore, possi *290

Other Sections in This Document (73)

Full Text