Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Curia v. Nelson, No. 07-2766

By FindLaw Staff on November 20, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

In parties' dispute over the terms of a stock purchase agreement entered into in 1989 and several modification of the agreement over the next decade involving a small number of shares in two automobile dealerships and whether the contract also gave plaintiff option to purchase remaining shares, summary judgment in plaintiff's favor is reversed as extrinsic evidence is required to clarify what the parties meant because the contract as modified is reasonably susceptible to both parties' interpretation and is therefore ambiguous regarding the survival of the options.     

Curia v. Nelson, No. 07-2766

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Western Division

Decided November 20, 2009


Before:  Williams, and Kanne and Sykes, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Circuit Judge Sykes

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard