6. armed robbery w/5 gun, "gun" occurs to September 17, 2010. Xiong, who is from Laos, became a refugee due to the Vietnam War. 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." She did not then understand "when or what paperwork that we had signed with him giving him the rights to the litters.". Stoll valued the litter at about two hundred sixteen thousand dollars. Stoll v. Chong Lor Xiong, 2010 OK CIV APP 110, 16. Couple fails to deliver chicken litter and failing to perform the the 30 year provision stated in the contract. Xiongs wife Mee Yang needed an English interpreter to communicate. Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian . Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF DELAWARE COUNTY, OKLAHOMA. 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. make, on the one hand, and which no fair and honest man would accept on the other." 13 At hearing, the trial court commented: I've read this and reread this and reread this. 318, 322 (N.D. Okla. 1980), accord, 12A O.S.2001 2-302, Oklahoma Code Comment ("Note that the determination of 'unconscionable' is one of law for the court."). Chong Lor Xiong and Mee Yang are husband and wife. United States District Court of Northern District of New York, United States District Courts. 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. 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. Yang testified: I don't know if he's supposed to get the chicken litter free or not. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. The trial court found the litter provision unconscionable and granted summary judgment in the buyers favor. Afterwards, the bedding shavings are replenished for the next flock to a level set by Simmons contract. He lived in a refugee camp in Thailand for three years. Would you have reached the . 2nd Circuit. He alleged Buyers. Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian. According to his petition, Stoll discovered Yang and Xiong were selling the chicken litter to others and the chicken litter shed was empty on or about March 24, 2009.4 His suit against Buyers was filed the next day. The Xiong's purchased land for 130,000. Appeal From The District Court Of Delaware County, Oklahoma; Honorable Robert G. Haney, Trial Judge. Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian. Did the court act appropriately in your opinion? Section 2-302 provides: (1) If the court as a matter of law finds the contract or any clause of the contract to have been unconscionable at the time it was made the court may refuse to enforce the contract, or it may enforce the remainder of the contract without the unconscionable clause, or it may so limit the application of any unconscionable clause as to avoid any unconscionable result. DIGITAL LAW Electronic Contracts and Licenses 2. After 2008, rising oil prices drove up the cost of commercial fertilizer, but before then he had not sold litter for more than $12 per ton. Fickel v. Webb, 1930 OK 432, 293 P. 206; Morton v. Roberts, 1923 OK 126, 213 P. 297. Private DEMYSTIFYING PUBLISHING CONTRACTS 6 Key Clauses Found in Commercial Contracts Court of Civil Appeals 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. 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. 11 Buyers moved for summary judgment, arguing there is no dispute about material facts, the contract is unconscionable as a matter of law, and that as a consequence of this unconscionability, all of Stoll's claims should be denied and judgment be entered in their favor. After 2008, rising oil prices drove up the cost of commercial fertilizer, but before then he had not sold litter for more than $12 per ton. Ronald STOLL, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. CHONG LOR XIONG and Mee Yang, Defendants/Appellees. Praesent varius sit amet erat hendrerit placerat. Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian. Business Management Business Law BUL 2241 Answer & Explanation Solved by verified expert Answered by thomaskyalo80 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. 15 In their motion for summary judgment, Buyers argued the contract was unconscionable and there is no "colorable argument that the contract was bargained for between informed parties." 10th Circuit. right or left of "armed robbery. However, at her own deposition, Ms. Lee was herself assisted by an interpreter. Stoll v. Xiong UNCONSCIONABLE CONTRACTS Chong Lor Xiong and his wife Mee Yang are purchasing property in US. The purchase price is described as "One Hundred Twenty Thousand Dollars ($130,000) [sic]. 330 (1895) Structural Polymer Group, Ltd. v. Zoltek Corp. 543 F.3d 987 (2008) Sullivan v. O'Connor. She is a defendant in the companion case, in which she testified she did not think he would take the chicken litter "for free." Fickel v. Webb, 1930 OK 432, 293 P. 206; Morton v. Roberts, 1923 OK 126, 213 P. 297. Opinion by WM. 134961. ", Bidirectional search: in armed robbery Advanced A.I. 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 alleged Buyers had a prior version of their agreement5 which contained the same paragraph in dispute but did not attempt to have it translated or explained to them and they should not benefit by failing to take such steps or from their failure to read the agreement. Founded over 20 years ago, vLex provides a first-class and comprehensive service for lawyers, law firms, government departments, and law schools around the world. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. Stoll asked the court to order specific performance on the litter provision of the contract. They received little or no education and could. . App. 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. 4 Xiong and Yang are husband and wife. View Case Cited Cases Citing Case Cited Cases 17 "The question of unconscionability is one of law for the Court to decide." Like in Fickel, the actual price is so gross as to shock the conscience. She testified Stoll told her "that we had to understand that we had signed over the litter to him." Buyers responded, arguing their illiteracy forced them to rely upon representations made to them and the interpreter available to them, Xiong's sister, explained the land purchase price but did not herself understand the meaning of the chicken litter paragraph.8. Try it free for 7 days! at 1020. He testified that one house de-caking of a house like those of Buyers yields about 20 tons of litter. He lived in a refugee camp in Thailand for three years. Perry v. Green, 1970 OK 70, 468 P.2d 483. 1976 OK 33, 23, 548 P.2d at 1020. Eddie L. Carr, Christopher D. Wolek, Oliver L. Smith, Gibbs Armstrong Borochoff Mullican Hart, P.C., Tulsa, OK, for Plaintiff/Appellant. After arriving in the United States, he attended an adult school for two years in St. Paul, Minnesota, where he learned to speak English and learned the alphabet. 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 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. The trial court found the chicken litter clause was unconscionable, granted Buyers' motion for summary judgment, denied Stoll's motion for summary judgment, and entered judgment in favor of Buyers on Stoll's petition. Defendant Yang was a Hmong immigrant from Laos, and received no education. Her deposition testimony was taken using Yer Lee, a defendant in companion Case No. 107879, 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. He testified he understands some spoken English but can only read a "couple" written words. 39 N.E. The buyers relied on a relative to interpret for them. The opposing motions for summary judgment in this case and those filed in companion Case No. Was the chicken litter clause in the land purchase contract unconscionable? They request reformation of the contract or a finding the contract is invalid. His suit against Buyers was filed the next day. 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. 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. Buyers responded, arguing their illiteracy forced them to rely upon representations made to them and the interpreter available to them, Xiong's sister, explained the land purchase price but did not herself understand the meaning of the chicken litter paragraph.8. After arriving in the United States, he attended an adult school for two years in St. Paul, Minnesota, where he learned to speak English and learned the alphabet. 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. Under such circumstances, there is no assent to terms. - 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). View the full answer Step 2/2 He contends the contract was valid and enforceable. CASE 9.6 Stoll v. Xiong 9. The equitable concept of unconscionability is meaningful only within the context of otherwise defined factors of onerous inequality, deception, and oppression. Stoll moved for summary judgment in his favor, claiming there was no dispute Buyers signed the Agreement to Sell Real Estate on January 1, 2005, and under that agreement he was entitled to the chicken litter for 30 years. 18 According to Stoll's deposition testimony in the companion case, which testimony is provided to support his motion for summary judgment in this case, it was his idea to include the chicken litter paragraph in the land purchase contract. Plaintiffs petition claimed that defendants breached their contract with him by attempting to sell their chicken litter to someone else and asked for specific performance and a temporary injunction to prevent any sales to third-parties. Stoll testified he believed his land was worth $2,000 per acre rather than the $1,200 per acre price of nearby land in 2004 due to the work he had done to clear and level it. 241 P.3d 301 (2010) Strong v. Sheffield. They claim this demonstrates how unreasonably favorable to one party the chicken litter provisions are and how those provisions are "the personification of the kind of inequality and oppression that courts have found is the hallmark of unconscionability.". Opinion by Wm. Mark D. Antinoro, Taylor, Burrage Law Firm, Claremore, OK, for Defendants/Appellees. 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. We agree such an analogy is helpful with this analysis. COA No. You can explore additional available newsletters here. Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. We agree such an analogy is helpful with this analysis. And to be real honest with you, I can't think of one. You're all set! We just asked him to help us [sic] half of what the de-cake cost is, and he said no. We agree. Subscribers are able to see the revised versions of legislation with amendments. 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. This prior agreement lists the purchase price as $120,000 and there is no provision for a road. pronounced. An unconscionable contract is one which no person in his senses, not under delusion would make, on the one hand, and which no fair and honest person would accept on the other. 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. CHONG LOR XIONG. 14 Stoll argues the trial court erred in finding the chicken litter clause was unconscionable as a matter of law, "by considering the fairness of the contract," and by considering "anything other than fraud, duress, undue influence, mistake, or illegality of the contract."
Kris Jones Daughter Dayla,
Cannoli Filling Without Ricotta,
Ghost Recon Breakpoint Pirate Camp Wild Coast,
Articles S
