This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Schumacher (D) leased a store to Martin (P). The lease provided that P was entitled to renew the lease for an additional five-year term at a rental rate to be agreed upon. P gave notice to D to exercise the renewal provision. D quoted a price of $900 a month. P hired an appraiser who indicated that a fair market value for the store was $545.41 a month. P sued for specific performance. D sued for eviction and won; the lease provision was an agreement to agree and was not enforceable. The appellate court reversed and held that P should be allowed to prove whether a binding agreement was intended by the parties. The appellate ruling overturned established precedent. The question was certified to the court of appeals.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.