stoll v xiongsteelseries oled gifs

For thirty years, the estimated value of the de-caked chicken litter using Stoll's $12 value would be $216,000, or roughly an additional $3,325.12 more per acre just from de-caked chicken litter sales than the $2,000 per acre purchase price stated on the first page of the contract. 16 In Barnes v. Helfenbein, 1976 OK 33, 548 P.2d 1014, the Court, analyzing the equitable concept of unconscionability in the context of a loan with the Uniform Consumer Credit Code, 14A O.S. The court affirmed the district courts judgment. Mark D. Antinoro, TAYLOR, BURRAGE LAW FIRM, Claremore, Oklahoma, for Defendants/Appellees. 318, 322 (N.D.Okla. He testified that one house de-caking of a house like those of Buyers yields about 20 tons of litter. 9 Stoll's petition claims Buyers breached their contract with him by attempting to sell their chicken litter to someone else and asks for specific performance and a temporary injunction to prevent any sales to third-parties. As is recognized in Restatement (Second) of Contracts, 208, Comment a, (1981): Uniform Commercial Code 2-302 is literally inapplicable to contracts not involving the sale of goods, but it has proven very influential in non-sales cases. 107,879, brought by Stoll against Xiong's sister, Yer Lee, and her husband, Shong Lee, to enforce provisions of a contract containing the same 30-year chicken litter provision, were argued at a single hearing. We agree such an analogy is helpful with this analysis. Best in class Law School Case Briefs | Facts: Spouses Chong Lor Xiong and Mee Yang (plaintiffs) are both Laotian immigrants. Farmers used litter to fertilize their crops. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. No. We affirm the trial court's findings the contract paragraph supporting Stoll's claim is unconscionable and Buyers were entitled to judgment in their favor as a matter of law. He lived in a refugee camp in Thailand for three years. An order granting summary relief, in whole or in part, disposes solely of law questions and hence is reviewable by a de novo standard. Stoll v. Xiong (unconscionable contract not enforced) Mance v. Mercedes-Benz USA (arbitration clause in automobile purchase contract enforced) Menendez v. O'Neill (sole shareholder of corporation not liable for corporation's liabilities) In re Estate of Haviland (undue influence on elderly man in preparing estate documents) Yarde Metals . Unconscionability is directly related to fraud and deceit. Yang is a Hmong immigrant from Laos.1 She received no education in Laos and her subsequent education consists of a six month "adult school" program after her arrival in 1985 in the United States at age 19. It has many times been used either by analogy or because it was felt to embody a generally accepted social attitude of fairness going beyond its statutory application to sales of goods. Ronald STOLL, Plaintiff/Appellant,v.CHONG LOR XIONG and Mee Yang, Defendants/Appellees. Globalrock Networks, Inc. v. MCI Communications Services, Inc. The question of unconscionability is one of law for the Court to decide. Stoll v. Chong Lor Xiong. Western District of Oklahoma. 8 Xiong testified that in February of 2009 he had traded the chicken litter from the first complete clean out of their six houses for shavings. He lived in a refugee camp in Thailand for three years. Melody Boeckman, No. Get free summaries of new Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. 33-The case Turner Broadcasting v. McDavid is one of my favorite cases in the textbook. Subscribers are able to see a list of all the documents that have cited the case. September 17, 2010. 3 On review of summary judgments, 27 Citing Cases From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research Loffland Bros. Co. v. Overstreet Download PDF Check Treatment Red flags, copy-with-cite, case summaries, annotated statutes and more. - Stoll contracted to sell the Xiong's a 60-acre parcel of land in Oklahoma for $130,000 ($2,000 per acer plus $10,000 for a road). 2 When addressing a claim that summary adjudication was inappropriate, we must examine the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and other evidentiary materials submitted by the parties and affirm if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Loffland Brothers Company v. Overstreet, 1988 OK 60, 15, 758 P.2d 813, 817. A few years before this contract, other property in the area sold for one thousand two hundred dollars an acre. He also claims he is entitled to immediate possession and if the litter has been taken in execution of a judgment against him, is exempt from being so taken. Unconscionability has generally been recognized to include an absence of meaningful choice on the part of one of the parties, together with contractual terms which are unreasonably favorable to the other party. Their poor English leads them to oversee a provision in the contract stating that they are to also deliver to Stoll (seller) for 30 years the litter from chicken houses that the Buyers had on the property so that Stoll can sell the litter. The trial court found the chicken litter clause in the land purchase contract unconscionable as a matter of law and entered judgment in Buyers' favor. We affirm the trial court's findings the contract paragraph supporting Stoll's claim is unconscionable and Buyers were entitled to judgment in their favor as a matter of law. Use this button to switch between dark and light mode. 2001 2-302[ 12A-2-302], has addressed uneonscionability in the context of the sale of goods under the Uniform Commercial Code. STOLL v. CHONG LOR XIONG. She testified Stoll told her "that we had to understand that we had signed over the litter to him." In 2005, defendants contractedto purchase from plaintiff Ronald Stoll as Seller, a sixty-acre parcel of real estate. Set out the facts of the Stoll v. Xiong case. 2 When addressing a claim that summary adjudication was inappropriate, we must examine the pleadings, depositions, affidavits and other evidentiary materials submitted by the parties and affirm if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 10 Buyers answered and stated affirmative defenses and counter claims, including that the sales contract has merged into their deed filed February 18, 2005 without incorporation of the provision on chicken litter such that the provision can not run with the land; impossibility of performance due to Stoll's violations of concentrate feeding operations statutory provisions; unconscionability of the contract; fraud due to Stoll's failure to provide cost information despite their limited language skills; trespass; and damages for harm to a shed caused by Stoll's heavy equipment. He testified he understands some spoken English but can only read a "couple" written words. 3 On review of summary judgments, the appellate court may "substitute its analysis of the record for the trial court's analysis" because the facts are presented in documentary form. Stoll v. Chong Lor Xiong, 241 P.3d 301 (Okla. Civ. Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian. Couple neglects to provide the chicken litter and neglects to play out the long term arrangement expressed in the agreement. However, at her own deposition, Ms. Lee was herself assisted by an interpreter. The actual price Buyers will pay under the paragraph Stoll included in the land sale contract is so gross as to shock the conscience. He also testified he had independent knowledge, due to having put shavings into ten houses eight weeks prior to his deposition on April 9, 2009, that a chicken house estate located in the same size as Buyers' houses took one semi load of shavings at a cost of $1,600 per load. Was the chicken litter clause in the land purchase contract unconscionable? He claims the trial court should have recognized "the validity of the contract at issue" and granted him judgment as a matter of law. Mark D. Antinoro, Taylor, Burrage Law Firm, Claremore, OK, for Defendants/Appellees. Defendant testified that plaintiff told her that they had to understand that they had signed over the litter to him. eCase is one of the world's most informative online sources for cases from different courts in United States' Federal and all states, and court cases will be updated continually - legalzone Under the contract, the buyers paid Stoll two thousand dollars per acre and an additional ten thousand dollars for construction of an access road. 5. The three-page Agreement to Sell Real Estate appears to be missing a page. He also claims he is entitled to immediate possession and if the litter has been taken in execution of a judgment against him, is exempt from being so taken. 3 On review of summary judgments, the appellate court may "substitute its analysis of the record for the trial court's analysis" because the facts are presented in documentary form. Under such circumstances, there is no assent to terms. 6 On January 1, 2005, Buyers contracted2 to purchase from Stoll as Seller "a sixty (60) acre parcel of real estate located in Delaware County, Oklahoma approximately .5 miles East of the current Black Oak Farm, and adjacent to land recently purchased by Shong Lee and Yer Xiong Lee." Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma,Division No. whether one party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because there are no material disputed factual questions." Loffland Brothers Company v. Over-street, 1988 OK 60, 15, 758 P.2d 813, 817. Updated daily, vLex brings together legal information from over 750 publishing partners, providing access to over 2,500 legal and news sources from the worlds leading publishers. Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. And I have tried to think of an example that I think was more unconscionable than the situation than (sic) I find to have been here as far as that clause. 5 According to Stoll, on November 8, 2004, Buyers signed a "preliminary" version of the contract which he did not execute, the contract terms at issue are the same as those in the executed January 1, 2005 contract, and they had time to have the disputed terms explained to them during the interim. When they bought a chicken farm next door to Xiong's sister and her husband, seller Ronald Stoll (plaintiff) gave them a preliminary contract to review that specified a price of $2,000 per acre. 107880. Xiong testified at deposition that they raised five flocks per year in their six houses. Private DEMYSTIFYING PUBLISHING CONTRACTS 6 Key Clauses Found in Commercial Contracts Opinion by WM. 17 "The question of unconscionability is one of law for the Court to decide." Under Stoll's interpretation of paragraph 10, Buyers' separate business would generate an asset for thirty years for which they receive no consideration and would serve as additional payment to him over and above the stated price for the land. Similar motions were filed in companion Case No. The opposing motions for summary judgment in this case and those filed in companion Case No. 269501. Yang testified: The de-caking process involves removal of some of the upper layer of bedding used by a flock. 6 On January 1, 2005, Buyers contracted to purchase from Stoll as Seller "a sixty (60) acre parcel of real Delaware County, Oklahoma approximately 5 miles East of the current Black Oak Farm, and adjacent to land recently purchased by Shong Lee and Yer Xiong Lee." 1. Stoll testified in a deposition taken in the companion case that the litter had value to him because I was trading it for a litter truck and a tractor. He was unsure what damages he would sustain from not having the litter but had told people he would have litter for sale, now it's not available. He also testified he had independent knowledge, due to having put shavings into ten houses eight weeks prior to his deposition on April 9, 2009, that a chicken house the same size as Buyers' houses took one semi load of shavings at a cost of $1,600 per load.

Lexus Gx470 Intake Manifold Removal, Skin Tag Removal Healing Time, Examples Of Good And Bad Fathers In The Bible, Articles S

This entry was posted in "barbara nichols husband" by . Bookmark the female canary for sale.