Mansfield Square, Ltd. v. Big Lots, Inc.

2 Citing cases

  1. Skyway Grp. v. Ge Honda Aero Engines LLC

    1:21-cv-51 (S.D. Ohio Dec. 13, 2021)

    In reaching this conclusion, the Court is guided by analogous case law in which a plaintiff sought to invoke a promissory estoppel theory despite the existence of a writing indicating the parties' intent not to be bound before reaching a final contract. For example, in Mansfield Square, Ltd. v. Big Lots, Inc., No. 08AP-387, 2008 WL 5159930, at ¶ 4, *1 (Ohio Ct. App. Dec. 9, 2008), the parties had exchanged letters of intent negotiating the terms of a potential lease agreement, and the defendant's sole letter of intent expressly stated that “[n]o commitment by [defendant] shall be considered binding until all of the terms are reduced to a written lease ….” The Ohio court found that, under such circumstances, any reliance by the plaintiff on promises by the defendant to enter into the lease agreement was unreasonable as a matter of 9 law

  2. Bank of America, N.A. v. Corporex Realty & Investment, LLC

    875 F. Supp. 2d 689 (E.D. Ky. 2012)   Cited 14 times
    In Corporex, the court held that dismissal of the defendants' counterclaim for breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing was not warranted.

    BOA cites Mansfield Square, Ltd. v. Big Lots, Inc., 2008 WL 5159930 (Ohio Ct.App. Dec. 9, 2008) for the proposition that any reliance by Defendants was unreasonable because the loan documents did not permit oral modifications. However, this case is not applicable to the present case because Defendants are not seeking to enforce the term sheets of the modification/extension negotiations.