LEGAL CASE

Legal Case comparison and discussion

Legal Case comparison and discussion

LLC vs. Wild Oats Markets, Inc.

Wild Oats Markets is an operator of food stores and farmers markets in North America. The stores offered dry grocery, meat, poultry, seafood, dairy, frozen, prepared foods, bakery, vitamins and supplements, health and body care, and household items. Whereas, LLC.

The case came under the jurisdiction of Supreme Court of Arizona state and the case against them by the landlord was of breaching continuously with their operations. However, by this act their store in Arizona closed down. Once the file got suited against White Oats the there was a demand of $1.5 million along with an accelerated rental allowance of $360,000 as a fees. The charges set by the landlord on Wild Oats were for the diminution the value of the shopping centre. However, in return White Oats came with their convenient payback for the damage by appealing against the charges with Supreme Court of Arizona. Furthermore, as the case developed and took a shape by November 2001 plaintiff awarded a total of $536000 for the damages made by White Oat and the attorney's fees. In regard to that the company again appeals to the court in the first quarter of 2004 for reconsideration. Moreover, the company thought to have decision made in their favor. This was all in return of the charge set on them by the Arizona State Court at the end of the year 2003 where they got charged the amount if $705000 which included the estimated damages by creating a judgment of them along with the fees of attorneys.

My point of view is that the final charges made by the court gets justified with the damage White Oat made by breaching the contract with their daily operations. However, the charges that got suited against them initially did not justify as they were higher than the damage. My point of view is that court could fine the land lord for suiting a file with such huge amount. He was got greedy and looking for greater monetary benefits. To sum it up the decision made by court overall did satisfy me and it is correct.

Sheerer vs. Fisher

Scheerer is a real estate agent who did a deal with fisher and helped in arranging him property worth $20million. However, the parties decided to gave a two percent commission to their agent (Fisher), but the deal fell apart before it got executed. However, Fisher did a deal with third party and didn't receive any commission for the deal. However, instead of suing the third party he sued Scheerer. The rational of the case is that there is definitely a breach of law by Fisher and Scheerer should not be alleged for this suit against him. Therefore, the suit made against Scheerer tends to be useless and with no relevant evidence. This is an act of fraud made by Fisher, as Scheerer had nothing with the deal and he didn't have obligations on him to give ...