Business Law Case-Thomas vs Thomas
Case Brief Assignment: Thomas verses Thomas
FACTS: Drew Thomas started working at Thomas Motors for his father, Ron Thomas, in the fall of 1997. Drew was a salesperson of new and used cars at Lanny Berg Chevrolet in Caldwell, Idaho about eight years ago. During the summer of 1997, his father Ron offered him to work at Ron’s new-purchased car dealership. Drew states before he accepted his father’s offer, besides the salary, his father also promised him to give Thomas Motors to him after Ron’s retirement. However, this business transfer deal was not written in the contract.
From Fall 1977 to Summer 2000, Drew’s salary was less than the former dealership where he used to work because he believe this is the price he has to pay for in order to take over Thomas Motors from his father. However, Ron and Ron’s wife Elaine claimed that this payment was a price term included in the contract to transfer Thomas Motors which was never agreed upon. Thomas Motors was sold in 2006 without notifying Drew. On June 21, 2006, Drew filed suit to the district court against Ron, Elaine, and Thomas Motor for breach of the oral contract and unjust enrichment.
The district court claimed that an express enforceable employment contract covered the same subject for the unjust-enrichment claim. On the second motion, the court dismissed the oral contract claim because there was a material price term in the oral contract which was never agreed upon and therefore the contract was not enforceable. Drew appealed the district court for determining there was an express oral employment contract separate and apart from the promise; and it prematurely dismissed the unjust-enrichment claim considering the Thomas Motors transfer was not enforceable.
ISSUES: The court granted the motion, finding that the parties did not enter into a valid enforceable contract because (1) a material term of the alleged agreement was for Drew to pay a monetary price for the business (2) the parties never reached an
FACTS: Drew Thomas started working at Thomas Motors for his father, Ron Thomas, in the fall of 1997. Drew was a salesperson of new and used cars at Lanny Berg Chevrolet in Caldwell, Idaho about eight years ago. During the summer of 1997, his father Ron offered him to work at Ron’s new-purchased car dealership. Drew states before he accepted his father’s offer, besides the salary, his father also promised him to give Thomas Motors to him after Ron’s retirement. However, this business transfer deal was not written in the contract.
From Fall 1977 to Summer 2000, Drew’s salary was less than the former dealership where he used to work because he believe this is the price he has to pay for in order to take over Thomas Motors from his father. However, Ron and Ron’s wife Elaine claimed that this payment was a price term included in the contract to transfer Thomas Motors which was never agreed upon. Thomas Motors was sold in 2006 without notifying Drew. On June 21, 2006, Drew filed suit to the district court against Ron, Elaine, and Thomas Motor for breach of the oral contract and unjust enrichment.
The district court claimed that an express enforceable employment contract covered the same subject for the unjust-enrichment claim. On the second motion, the court dismissed the oral contract claim because there was a material price term in the oral contract which was never agreed upon and therefore the contract was not enforceable. Drew appealed the district court for determining there was an express oral employment contract separate and apart from the promise; and it prematurely dismissed the unjust-enrichment claim considering the Thomas Motors transfer was not enforceable.
ISSUES: The court granted the motion, finding that the parties did not enter into a valid enforceable contract because (1) a material term of the alleged agreement was for Drew to pay a monetary price for the business (2) the parties never reached an