Miller v. Flegenheimer
Vermont Supreme Court
161 A.3d 524 (2016)
Kenneth Miller (plaintiff) and Eric Flegenheimer (defendant) each owned half of the stock of a document-shredding company that they cofounded. In 2011, Miller and Flegenheimer began negotiating a buy-sell agreement that set forth how one partner could buy out the other partner’s interest in the company. Miller and Flegenheimer exchanged multiple drafts of the agreement, but negotiations broke down on December 9, 2013, when Miller would not sign the final draft. On December 26, Flegenheimer emailed Miller and offered to sell Miller his stock in the company. Many terms in Flegenheimer’s email were similar to terms in the buy-sell-agreement drafts exchanged by the parties. One similar term was a claw-back provision, which provided that if the buying partner sold the company within two years, the partners would equally split all sale proceeds in excess of a specified amount. On December 31, Miller emailed Flegenheimer and accepted the offer to purchase Flegenheimer’s shares at the requested price. Miller said that he would send “definitive documents” by January 10, 2014. On January 9, Miller sent Flegenheimer a lengthy stock-purchase agreement and a noncompete agreement that prohibited Flegenheimer from competing with the company or soliciting its employees or customers for three years. Miller’s documents also reduced the proposed sale price by $50,000. On January 14, Flegenheimer told Miller that he would not proceed with the sale. Miller sued Flegenheimer, seeking specific performance. The trial court entered judgment for Miller, holding that the parties’ December emails had created an enforceable preliminary agreement that required them to negotiate the remaining terms of their agreement in good faith. Both parties appealed to the Vermont Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Reiber, C.J.)
What to do next…
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 724,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
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.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,600 briefs, keyed to 983 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.