Lefkowitz v. Great Minn. Surplus Store, Inc.

251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)



Where the offer is clear, definite, and explicit, and leaves nothing open for negotiation, it constitutes an offer, acceptance of which will complete the contract.


On two separate Saturdays following the publication of ads for a store, a man went to the store and presented himself at the appropriate counter to buy a coat and stole that were advertised. He indicated his readiness to pay the sale price of $ 1. On both occasions, the store refused to sell the merchandise to the man, stating on the first occasion that by a "house rule" the offer was intended for women only and sales would not be made to men, and on the second visit that the knew the store's house rules. Damages were awarded to the man for breach of contract. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of Minnesota.


Was there a completed contract?




The Court determined that the offer by defendant of the sale of the item was clear, definite, and explicit, and left nothing open for negotiation. The man, having successfully managed to comply with the terms of the advertisement, and having offered the stated purchase price of the article, was entitled to performance on the part of the store. The court here agreed with the trial court's holding that the conduct of the parties created sufficient mutuality of obligation to constitute a contract of sale.

Click here to view the full text case and earn your Daily Research Points.