Sedmak v. Charlie’s Chevrolet, Inc.
Missouri Court of Appeals
622 S.W.2d 694 (1981)
- Written by Sarah Larkin, JD
Facts
Dr. and Mrs. Sedmak (plaintiffs) discovered that Chevrolet intended to manufacture a small number of a limited edition Corvette, the Pace car. Dr. Sedmak contacted Charlie’s Chevrolet, Inc. (Charlie’s) (defendant) to inquire about the car and Kells, Charlie’s sales manager, told him that a deposit would be required. Mrs. Sedmak hand-delivered the deposit to Charlie’s and received a receipt. While there, Mrs. Sedmak ordered upgrades to the standard equipment. According to Kells, he did order the upgrades, but ordered them because they would be better for the car, rather than because the Sedmaks wanted them. Mrs. Sedmak said that Kells told her that the car would cost about $15,000, but Kells denied discussing price. Kells notified the Sedmaks when the car arrived at Charlie’s, but informed them that they could not buy it for the price quoted because there had been so much demand for it that the price had inflated. He also notified them that they could bid on the car, but they did not submit a bid. The Sedmaks filed a suit for specific performance in the trial court. The trial court granted specific performance. Charlie’s appealed to the Missouri Court of Appeals.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Satz, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.
