Issue(s)
Did the Appellate Court err in finding Reiss and Rebot were bound by the reverse stock split?
Holding(s)
Yes.
Reasoning/Analysis
The Court found that even where a contingency has been omitted, we will not necessarily imply a term since courts may not by construction add or excise terms, nor distort the meaning of those used and thereby make a new contract. Financial should not be given a remedy to save it from the consequences of its own agreements.
Judgment/Outcome
The Court reversed the judgment of the lower court.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment