Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Hutton v. Monograms Plus, Inc.

Ohio Court of Appeals
604 N.E.2d 200 (Ohio Ct. App. 1992)


Facts

Monograms Plus, Inc. (MPI) (defendant) sold an MPI franchise to David Hutton (plaintiff). The franchise agreement included an addendum which stated that if Hutton were “unable . . . to obtain financing suitable to him” within 90 days of the execution of the agreement, he would be entitled to a refund of the franchise fee he paid as part of the agreement. The financing was needed in part to purchase or lease a monogramming machine. An MPI liaison secured financing for a monogram machine lease for Hutton. However, Hutton determined that the payments under this lease were too high—particularly when compared to a franchisee circular that MPI had sent him—and he did not sign the lease. Hutton attempted to lease the machine from another company, but the company denied his financing application. As a result, Hutton informed MPI that he was invoking his right to a refund of the franchise fee because he could not find financing suitable to him. MPI denied Hutton’s request. Hutton brought suit and moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted Hutton’s motion based on a subjective standard of the suitableness of the financing available to him. MPI appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Wolff, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence (Fain, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 203,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.