Page 14

Legal Update 2020
Instructor: John Henderson JT@grar.com

0:33 Minutes

CONTRACTS
 

Enforceability of a Contract of Adhesion 

Proulx vs.1400 PA Ave SE, LLC, No. 16-CV-1200 Superior Court CAR-3639-14 (2019) 

District of Columbia Court of Appeals 

Facts: Appellant was buying property from appellee to open a pizza business. Parties entered into a contract of sale and a preoccupancy agreement. Appellant stopped paying rent, vacated the building and refused to go to settlement. Appellant filed to rescind the contract and sought the return of their deposit. Appellee filed a counter-claim that the contract was valid and sought forfeiture of the deposit as liquidated damages per the contract; they also sought back rent due. 

Issue: Appellant argues that the court erred in (1) finding that the contract was not a contract of adhesion, and (2) concluding that the liquidated damages provision was valid. 

Held: Superior Court ruled that the contract was valid, agreed with the forfeiture of deposit provision and awarded unpaid rent to appellee. Court of Appeals upheld all. 

J T Henderson & Associates LLC Real Estate Brokers (888) 457-4601 ©2013 Licensed in the State of Michigan #6505-331222