Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNILAND PARTNERSHIP OF DELAWARE L.P., as Successor by Merger to Uniland Development Company, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. BLUE CROSS OF WESTERN NEW YORK INC., and HealthNow New York, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.
The parties entered into a lease agreement providing that defendants would lease property owned by plaintiff in the City of Buffalo for a term of 15 years and 6 months. Pursuant to the “Third Amendment to Lease,” the parties agreed to extend the lease term to a specified date. On the date on which the “Third Amendment to Lease” was executed, the parties also entered into a letter agreement with respect to early termination of the lease by defendants and construction of a new facility for defendants by plaintiff. Plaintiff thereafter commenced this action alleging that defendants breached that part of the letter agreement granting plaintiff “the exclusive right and option to develop or acquire building facilities for [defendants] within the eight counties of Western New York.”
Supreme Court erred in denying defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. The letter agreement provides that development of building facilities by plaintiff for defendants “shall be at site(s) or location(s) mutually agreed upon by” the parties. Because the parties left for future negotiation an essential term, i.e., the location of the building facilities, their letter agreement is “a mere agreement to agree” and is thus unenforceable (Joseph Martin, Jr., Delicatessen v. Schumacher, 52 N.Y.2d 105, 109, 436 N.Y.S.2d 247, 417 N.E.2d 541; see Bernstein v. Felske, 143 A.D.2d 863, 865, 533 N.Y.S.2d 538). In addition, the letter agreement provides that the parties shall enter into a lease agreement for the building facilities developed by plaintiff for defendants, but the letter agreement does not address the area to be leased, the duration of the lease, or the nature and cost of the development. In view of the fact that those material elements were either omitted or left for future negotiation, “the very indefiniteness of the [letter agreement] render[s] it impossible of enforcement” (St. Regis Paper Co. v. Rayward, 16 A.D.2d 130, 134, 225 N.Y.S.2d 871, affd. 12 N.Y.2d 1033, 239 N.Y.S.2d 551, 189 N.E.2d 815; see generally Durante Bros. Constr. Corp. v. College Point Sports Assn., 207 A.D.2d 379, 380, 615 N.Y.S.2d 455).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order insofar as appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law with costs, defendants' motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: March 17, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)