Super Glue Corp. v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. Get full access FREE With a 7-Day free trial membership Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our key terms: A complete online legal dictionary of law terms and legal definitions; 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. The agreement also describes the property as a parcel which is "adjacent to the farm recently purchased by Shong Lee and Yer Xiong Lee," le., Xiong's sister and brother-in-law, who are the defendants in the companion case. 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." Get free summaries of new Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals opinions delivered to your inbox! 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. Seller shall empty the litter shed completely between growing cycles so that the shed will be available for use by Buyers when needed. near:5 gun, "gun" occurs to either to The first paragraph on the next page is numbered 10, and paragraph numbering is consecutive through the third page, which contains the parties' signatures. She did not then understand "when or what paperwork that we had signed with him giving him the rights to the litters.". Yang testified: I don't know if he's supposed to get the chicken litter free or not. Defendant did not then understand when or what paperwork they had signed with him giving him the rights to the litters. Integer semper venenatis felis lacinia malesuada. 2nd Circuit. 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. He contends the contract was valid and enforceable. The Court went on to note: 17 "The question of uneonscionability is one of law for the Court to decide." 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. Yang is a Hmong immigrant from Laos. 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. Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. Get more case briefs explained with Quimbee. armed robbery w/5 gun, "gun" occurs to Heres how to get more nuanced and relevant The parties here provided evidence relating to their transaction. 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. 1. 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. Brown v. Nicholson, 1997 OK 32, 5, 935 P.2d 319, 321. 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. letters. Ronald STOLL, Plaintiff/Appellant,v.CHONG LOR XIONG and Mee Yang, Defendants/Appellees. Make your practice more effective and efficient with Casetexts legal research suite. Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. No. He testified he understands some spoken English but can only read a "couple" written words. Discuss the court decision in this 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. 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. 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. The parties here provided evidence relating to their transaction. We just asked him to help us [sic] half of what the de-cake cost is, and he said no. Midfirst Bank v. Safeguard Props., LLC, Case No. 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. 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 three-page Agreement to Sell Real Estate appears to be missing a page. For thirty years, the estimated value of the de-caked chicken litter using Stoll's $12 value would be $216,000. Bendszus M, Nieswandt B, Stoll G. (2007) Targeting platelets in acute experimental stroke: impact of glycoprotein Ib, VI, and IIb/IIIa blockade on infarct size, functional . 107,879. Want more details on this case? He testified he understands some spoken English but can only read a "couple" written words. Under Stoll's interpretation of paragraph 10 (which was his "idea"), the land sale contract is onerous to one side of the contracting parties while solely benefitting the other, and the parties to be surcharged with the extra expense were, due to language and education, unable to understand the nature of the contract. OFFICE HOURS: By appointment only and before/after class (limited). Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian. 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. Mark D. Antinoro, TAYLOR, BURRAGE LAW FIRM, Claremore, Oklahoma, for Defendants/Appellees. 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." 19 An analogy exists regarding the cancellation of deeds. Quimbee has over 16,300 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 223 casebooks https://www.quimbee.com/case-briefs-overview Stoll v. Xiong | 241 P.3d 301 (2010)From signing a lease to clicking a box when downloading an app, people regularly agree to contracts that may include undesirable or unfair terms. C. HETHERINGTON, JR., Judge. Applying these figures, the annual value of the litter from de-caking alone (i.e.,which does not include additional volumes of litter from a complete clean out) appears to range from roughly $7,200 to $15,000. Xiong had three years of school in Laos and learned to read and write Laotian . He contends the contract was valid and enforceable. 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.". Carmichael v. Beller, 1996 OK 48, 2, 914 P.2d 1051, 1053. 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. 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. FACTS 4 Xiong and Yang are husband and wife. Compare with Westlaw Opinion No. 17 "The question of unconscionability is one of law for the Court to decide." 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. At hearing on the motions for summary judgment,7 Stoll argued the contract was not unconscionable and it was simply a matter of buyer's remorse. 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. They request reformation of the contract or a finding the contract is invalid. Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma,Division No. Defendant testified that plaintiff told her that they had to understand that they had signed over the litter to him. 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. Stoll v. Chong Lor Xiong - 2010 OK CIV APP 110, 241 P.3d 301 Rule: The equitable concept of unconscionability is meaningful only within the context of otherwise defined factors of onerous inequality, deception, and oppression. Similar motions were filed in companion Case No. Here, a nearly reverse situation exists in that the consideration actually to be paid under the contract far exceeds that stated. 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. Western District of Oklahoma (2012) Distinctive Effects of T Cell Subsets in Neuronal Injury Induced by Cocultured Splenocytes In Vitro and by In Vivo Stroke in Mice. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google, Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals Decisions. After arriving in the United States, he attended an adult school for two years where he learned to speak English and learned the alphabet. Did the court act appropriately in your opinion? 4 His suit against Buyers was filed the next day. The Oklahoma Legislature, at 12A O.S.2001 2-302,9 has addressed unconscionability in the context of the sale of goods under the Uniform Commercial Code. Xiong testified at deposition that they raised five flocks per year in their six houses. Yang testified: The de-caking process involves removal of some of the upper layer of bedding used by a flock. He also claimed that he was entitled to immediate possession and if the litter has been taken in execution of a judgment against him, was exempt from being so taken. Farmers used litter to fertilize their crops. An order granting summary relief, in whole or in part, disposes solely of law questions and hence is reviewable by a de novo standard. E-Commerce 1. Ronald STOLL, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. CHONG LOR XIONG and Mee Yang, Defendants/Appellees. because the facts are presented in documentary form. She testified Stoll told her that we had to understand that we had signed over the litter to him. She did not then understand when or what paperwork that we had signed with him giving him the rights to the litters.. Ronald STOLL, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. CHONG LOR XIONG and Mee Yang, Defendants/Appellees. 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. 269501. 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. Released for Publication by Order of the Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma, Division No. At hearing on the motions for summary judgment, Stoll argued the contract was not unconscionable and it was simply a matter of buyer's remorse. Stoll appealed to the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals. 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. Stoll v. Xiong Case Brief Summary | Law Case ExplainedDeciphering Scholarly Publishing Contracts: Books Negotiating Literary Translation Contracts UCC Codes: UCC 1-308 Without Prejudice Sign this way \u0026 don't contract! His access to chicken litter was denied in that case in late 2008. GLOBAL LAW Contract Law in China " The movement of the progressive societies has hitherto been a movement from status to contract." Sir Henry Maine Ancient Law, Chapter 5 (1861) Introduction to Formation and Requirements of Contracts Stoll included a clause that required giving all the chicken litter to Stoll for free for 30 years. Try it free for 7 days! 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. 6 On January 1, 2005, Buyers contracted 2 to purchase from Stoll as Seller a sixty. He alleged Buyers had a prior version of their agreement 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. to the other party.Id. The UCC Book to read! 1 Her deposition testimony was taken using Yer Lee, a defendant in companion Case No. And if unconscionability has any meaning in the law at all, if that is a viable theory at all, then I think this is a prime example of it. Praesent varius sit amet erat hendrerit placerat. 19 An analogy exists regarding the cancellation of deeds. whether one party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because there are no material disputed factual questions." The buyers raised several defenses and counterclaims. Ross By and Through Ross v. City of Shawnee, 1984 OK 43, 683 P.2d 535. Afterwards, the bedding shavings are replenished for the next flock to a level set by Simmons contract. App. Similar motions were filed in companion Case No. 1976 OK 33, 23, 548 P.2d at 1020. This purchase price represents $2,000 per acre and $10,000 for the cost of an access road to be constructed to the property by Seller., The agreement also describes the property as a parcel which is, adjacent to the farm recently purchased by Shong Lee and Yer Xiong Lee,, 7 After the first growing cycle, Buyers de-caked.