Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Shocklee v. Albers Chiropractic Health Ctr., P.C., 558 S.W.3d 83 (2018)

Citation
Shocklee v. Albers Chiropractic Health Ctr., P.C., 558 S.W.3d 83 (2018)
Parent Document
Shocklee v. Albers Chiropractic Health Ctr., P.C., 558 S.W.3d 83 (2018)
Jurisdiction
Missouri (state)
Effective Date
2018-07-10

Other Sections in This Document (24)

Full Text

591 chars
At a hearing on their motion for new trial, the Shocklees argued that Dr. Albers had not effectively renewed the lease. In sum, they argued that Dr. Albers had made a counteroffer, not an election to renew. They maintained that when Dr. Albers added the extra term of "for three years" instead of the negotiated term of five years, Dr. Albers had made a counteroffer, which the Shocklees had not accepted. Thus they argued that because Dr. Albers only submitted a counteroffer and not an election to renew for the five-year term, she never actually elected to renew before the lease expired.