About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [i] (Spring 2026)

handle is hein.ali/contract0201 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2026 Citations CONTRACTS CHAPTER 3. FORMATION OF INFORMAL CONTRACTS TOPIC 2. MANIFESTATION OF ASSENT § 33. When an Indefinite Offer Creates a Contract Ohio App.2025. Cit. in case quot. in sup. (general cite). Minority shareholder in a family farm sued majority shareholder, who was his stepmother, alleging, among other things, that she breached an oral promise to transfer her shares to him if he took care of the farm like his father and grandfather did. The trial court granted summary judgment for majority shareholder on minority shareholder's breach-of- contract claim. This court affirmed, holding that majority shareholder's oral promise to transfer the shares to minority shareholder was not an enforceable contract, because the promise lacked definite terms and there was no meeting of the minds. Citing the Restatement of Contracts, the court reasoned that, when uncertainty surrounded important and key terms of a purported agreement between parties, there was a stronger indication that the parties did not intend to be bound by it. Clark v. Clark, 262 N.E.3d 473, 490. TOPIC 3. CONSIDERATION AND ITS SUFFICIENCY § 75. Definition of Consideration Pa.2025. Com. (b) quot. in sup. In divorce proceedings between pregnant mother and same-sex spouse, spouse filed a petition for special relief for pre-birth establishment of parentage, seeking an order confirming spouse as a legal parent to the child, who was conceived using donated sperm and assistive reproductive technology (ART). The trial court entered an order in spouse's favor, finding that an oral contract existed because the parties mutually agreed to conceive the child. The court of appeals affirmed. This court reversed on other grounds, holding that the lower courts erred in their analysis of the element of consideration in finding an oral contract existed. The court explained that, under Restatement of Contracts § 65, Comment b, spouse's agreement to pay for ART expenses and to share an emotional role during the pregnancy process did not constitute consideration, because the record did COPYRIGHT C2026 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.