Dr. John Holm signed a two-year employment agreement with Gateway Anesthesia Associates, PLLC. During negotiations for the agreement, Gateway’s president, Dr. Jon Nottingham, told Holm that on comple-tion of the contract he would become a partner in the firm and that during the term he would be paid “like a partner.” The written agreement did not reflect this promise—the con-tract read that Holm would be paid based on “net collections” for his services and did not state that he would become a part-ner. Later, Gateway told Holm that it did not intend to make him a partner. Holm filed a complaint in an Arizona state court against Gateway, alleging breach. Before the trial, Holm filed a motion to reform the contract to express what he had been told. Nottingham did not dispute Holm’s account. What is the basis for the reformation of a contract? Is it appropri-ate in this case? Why or why not?
Dr. John Holm signed a two-year employment agreement with Gateway Anesthesia Associates, PLLC. During negotiations for the agreement, Gateway’s president, Dr. Jon Nottingham, told Holm that on comple-tion of the contract he would become a partner in the firm and that during the term he would be paid “like a partner.” The written agreement did not reflect this promise—the con-tract read that Holm would be paid based on “net collections” for his services and did not state that he would become a part-ner. Later, Gateway told Holm that it did not intend to make him a partner. Holm filed a complaint in an Arizona state court against Gateway, alleging breach. Before the trial, Holm filed a motion to reform the contract to express what he had been told. Nottingham did not dispute Holm’s account. What is the basis for the reformation of a contract? Is it appropri-ate in this case? Why or why not?
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 4 steps
