From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bell v. B.F. Goodrich Company

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
Jun 8, 1971
359 Mass. 763 (Mass. 1971)

Summary

finding an agreement to negotiate “for as long as the parties agreed” to be “void for vagueness”

Summary of this case from Dixon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Opinion

June 8, 1971

Nelson S. Baker ( Charlotte A. Perretta with him) for the plaintiffs.

Neil L. Lynch for the defendant.


The Superior Court judge sustained the defendant's demurrer to the plaintiffs' declaration in a contract action for breach of an oral agreement. Count 1 of the plaintiffs' declaration alleges breach of an oral agreement made in Ohio whereby the defendant agreed to negotiate with the plaintiffs for the acquisition by Star-Lite Industries of the defendant's Rayco Division (Rayco); the defendant agreed to negotiate only with the plaintiffs until an agreement was consummated or until both parties mutually agreed to terminate their negotiations. The defendant subsequently negotiated a purchase and sale agreement for Rayco with another party while it was negotiating with the plaintiffs. Count 2 alleges breach of an oral agreement with the defendant giving the plaintiffs, on behalf of Star-Lite Industries, first option to purchase Rayco. This count states no option price and no period of time for the duration of the option. The plaintiffs' declaration is insufficient in law to establish a contract. The declaration, in essence, alleges an agreement to negotiate and does not create a binding contract. Moreover, the declaration at most alleges that the defendant agreed with the plaintiffs to negotiate for the sale of the defendant's Rayco Division for as long as the parties agreed. Such an agreement is void for vagueness. Restatement 2d: Contracts, § 32 (Tent. draft No. 1, April 13, 1964). Lyman v. Robinson, 14 Allen, 242, 254. Caggiano v. Marchegiano, 327 Mass. 574. General Motors Corp. v. Keener Motors, Inc. 194 F.2d 669, 676-677 (6th Cir.) (discussing Ohio law). Corbin, Contracts, § 95. The order sustaining the demurrer is affirmed.

So ordered.


Summaries of

Bell v. B.F. Goodrich Company

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
Jun 8, 1971
359 Mass. 763 (Mass. 1971)

finding an agreement to negotiate “for as long as the parties agreed” to be “void for vagueness”

Summary of this case from Dixon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

finding oral agreement to negotiate does not create binding contract

Summary of this case from Hutchins v. Zoll Medical Corp.
Case details for

Bell v. B.F. Goodrich Company

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT B. BELL another vs. B.F. GOODRICH COMPANY

Court:Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

Date published: Jun 8, 1971

Citations

359 Mass. 763 (Mass. 1971)
270 N.E.2d 926

Citing Cases

Dixon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Caggiano v. Marchegiano, 327 Mass. 574, 580, 99 N.E.2d 861 (1951); see Sax v. DiPrete, 639 F.Supp.2d 165, 171…

Targus Group Intl. v. Sherman, No

Air Technology Corp. v. General Electric Co., 347 Mass. 613, 626 (1964). See also Bell v. B.F. Goodrich Co.,…