Plaintiff's insistence that it misunderstood that a provision of the lease authorized, but did not require, defendant to cancel the lease under certain circumstances is insufficient to establish an absence of the requisite meeting of minds as might justify either rescission or reformation. The language of the lease does not support this understanding of its meaning, and there is no evidence of fraud or misrepresentation by defendant. We have considered plaintiff's other contentions...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
