ÿWPC³ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µbÝw@å4% 9 H 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ U,- 0dY U,½ U>é B)'DCP AM“U*à B #'v~JvÓÈ D3› 0@Î AOÆ] 0D# D/g B–˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡- ù- ëRìDíDîUïDðñDòUóÓ€ýGav 3|xý2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌMarch€29,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA:Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA:Op Monaco Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€FfXXdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñ›ETHEL€RICH€MARSHALL,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àDavidson€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€95„1555„IIIÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9511„CH„00495ÌDON€SUMMERS,€and€RON€œBOTTORFF›,à à)ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€#&";+'h|¨üŒ` ç `€€Lß›a€partnership,€d/b/a€Summers€Lumber€&à à)ÌTimber€Co.,€à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellants,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌANDà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌWILLIAM€J.€œPRATT›,€JR.,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àNominal€Defendant.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€OF€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌà@ àHONORABLE€ROBERT€S.€œBRANDT›,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌKenneth€F.€ScottÌTUNE,€œENTREKIN›€&€WHITEÌFirst€American€Center,€œ21st›€FloorÌNashville,€Tennessee€37238ÌATTORNEY€FOR€PLAINTIFF/APPELLEEÌÌÌJeffrey€œZager›ÌMary€Ellen€MorrisÌœTRABUE›,€œSTURDIVANT›€&€œDeWITT›Ìœ25th›€Floor€Nashville€City€CenterÌ511€Union€StreetÌNashville,€Tennessee€37219ÌATTORNEYS€FOR€DEFENDANTS/APPELLANTSÌÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌCONCUR:ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGEÇETHEL€RICH€MARSHALL,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àDavidson€ChanceryÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€95„1555„IIIÌœVS›.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à01„A„01„9511„CH„00495ÌDON€SUMMERS,€and€RON€œBOTTORFF›,à à)Ìa€partnership,€d/b/a€Summers€Lumber€&à à)ÌTimber€Co.,€à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellants,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌANDà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌWILLIAM€J.€œPRATT›,€JR.,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àNominal€Defendant.à àà àà à)ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà à€€òòO€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€captioned€defendants,€Don€Summers€and€Ron€œBottorff›,€partners€doing€business€asÏSummers€Lumber€&€Timber€Co.,€have€appealed€from€a€Rule€54.02€partial€summary€judgmentÏinterpreting€a€provision€of€a€lease€between€the€captioned€plaintiff€as€lessor€and€the€appellants€asÏlessees.€€The€other€captioned€defendant€is€not€a€party€to€this€appeal.ÌÌà àOn€April€1,€1985,€the€plaintiff„appellee,€as€lessor,€and€the€defendants„appellants€asÏlessees,€entered€into€a€lease€agreement€relating€to€commercial€property€for€use€as€a€lumber€shedÏand€yard.€€The€lease€was€for€a€term€of€five€years,€ending€on€March€31,€1990,€with€option€for€aÏfive€year€renewal,€ð ðterms€and€conditions€to€be€agreed€upon€at€that€time€by€both€parties.ððÌÌà àAt€some€time€in€1987,€the€parties€to€the€lease€executed€an€undated€ð ðAddendum€to€LeaseÏAgreement,ðð€containing€the€following€provisions:Ìà à1.€€Lessees€were€granted€options€to€extend€the€lease€by€four€successive€renewals€of€fiveÏyears€each€at€a€10%€increase€in€rent€during€each€renewal€period.Ìà à2.€€Lessees€were€permitted€to€construct€additional€buildings€and€to€remove€same€at€theÏexpiration€of€the€lease.€€Ìà à3.€€Articles€IV€and€VII€of€the€amendment€were€verbatim€as€follows:ÌÓ  ÓÓÓIV.ÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 à€€RIGHT€OF€FIRST€REFUSAL.€€Should€LESSOR,€during€theÏlease€term€(including€any€option€term)€or€any€extension€thereof,Ïelect€to€sell€all€or€any€portion€of€the€leased€premises,€whetherÏseparately€or€as€a€part€of€the€larger€parcel€of€which€the€leasedÏpremises€are€a€part,€the€òòLESSEE€shall€have€the€right€of€firstÏrefusal€to€meet€any€bona€fide€offer€of€sale€on€the€same€terms€andÏconditions€of€such€offer.óó€€Upon€the€òòLESSEEððs€failure€to€meetÏsuch€bona€fide€offer€within€60€days€after€noticeóó€thereof€from€theÏLESSOR,€the€òòLESSOR€shall€be€free€to€sell€the€premises€orÏportion€thereof€to€such€œthird€person€in€accordanceóó›€òòwith€the€termsÏand€conditions€of€his€offeróó.€€(In€handwriting,€the€following:€€InÏthe€event€of€a€sale€on€subject€property,€an€appraisal€will€be€madeÏby€both€Lessor€and€Lessee.€€/s/€Initials€ð ðœDTS›,ðð€ð ðœRB›,ðð€ð ðœERM›,ðð€ifÏno€offer€but€she€wanted€to€give.)ÌÌà8 àà8 àÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 àVII.ÌÓ  Óà8 àà8 à€€REMEDY€FOR€BREACH€OR€DEFAULT.€€In€the€event€of€aÏbreach€or€default€of€any€term€or€condition€of€THE€LEASE€or€theÏADDENDUM€TO€LEASE€the€aggrieved€party€shall€have€remedyÏby€òòspecific€performance€or€indemnification€of€damagesóó€and/orÏboth,€if€appropriate€under€the€circumstances.€€Further,€theÏòòaggrieved€shall€be€entitled€to€recover€all€expenses€and€costóó€inÏremedying€the€breach€or€default,€òòincluding€court€cost€andóóÏòòattorney€feesóó.€€(Emphasis€supplied.)ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€June€1,€1994,€the€lessor€entered€into€a€ð ðReal€Estate€Purchase€Agreementðð€withÏWilliam€J.€œPratt›,€Jr.,€regarding€the€leased€property.€€Said€agreement€contained€the€followingÏprovisions:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€11.€€CLOSING:€€Closing€shall€be€held€within€ninety€(90)€daysÏfrom€the€Effective€Date,€at€which€time€all€paper€necessary€toÏdeliver€good€and€marketable€title€shall€be€delivered€andÏexchanged.€€Closing€shall€be€held€at€a€mutually€acceptable€timeÍto€be€designated€at€least€ten€(10)€days€prior€to€the€closing€date.€ÏòòPossession€of€the€property€by€Buyer€shall€be€given€on€the€dateóóÏòòof€the€closingóó.€€Time€is€of€the€essence€as€to€all€terms€of€thisÏContract.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€13.€€CONFIDENTIALITY:€€Seller,€Buyer€and€representativesÏof€Centennial,€Inc.€acknowledge€the€confidentiality€of€thisÏtransaction€contemplated€herein€and€agree€hereby€not€to€discloseÏto€third€parties€any€of€the€term€or€conditions€of€this€Contract.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€14.€€CONTINGENCY:€€This€sale€is€contingent€upon€the€SellerÏterminating€the€lease€presently€in€force€on€this€property.€€òòShouldóóÏòòthe€lease€not€be€terminated€then€this€Contract€will€become€nullóóÏòòand€voidóó€and€all€earnest€money€will€be€returned€to€the€Buyer.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€16.€€RIGHT€OF€FIRST€REFUSAL:€€The€lease€mentioned€inÏparagraph€14€above€gives€the€Lessee€a€right€of€first€refusal€toÏaccept€any€offer€to€purchase€the€subject€property.€€Therefore,ÏSellerððs€acceptance€of€this€Agreement€is€subject€to€said€LesseeððsÏright€of€first€refusal.€€(Emphasis€supplied.)ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€September€23,€1994,€lessees€notified€lessor€that€they€were€exercising€their€option€ofÏrenewal€from€April€1,€1995,€through€March€31,€2000.ÌÌà àOn€December€22,€1994,€lessor€sent€the€following€notice€to€lessees:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àMy€lease€with€you€provides€that€you€as€Lessee€shall€have€theÏright€of€first€refusal€to€meet€any€bona€fide€offer€of€sale€on€theÏsame€terms€and€conditions€of€such€offer.€€Upon€your€(Lesseeððs)Ïfailure€to€meet€such€bona€fide€offer€within€60€days€after€noticeÏthereof€from€Lessor,€the€Lessor€shall€be€free€to€sell€the€premisesÏor€portion€thereof€to€such€third€person€in€accordance€with€theÏterms€and€conditions€of€the€offer.ÌÌà8 àà8 àI€am€enclosing€an€offer€to€purchase€the€premises.€€This€offer€isÏfrom€William€J.€œPratt›.€€The€purchase€price€is€$4.00€per€squareÏfoot.€€The€terms€of€the€offer€provided€that€the€sale€is€contingentÏupon€the€termination€of€your€lease.€€In€the€event€you€fail€toÏtimely€exercise€your€right€of€refusal€and€elect€not€to€purchase€theÏproperty€pursuant€to€this€offer,€I€intend€to€close€on€the€offer.€ÍòòSince€the€terms€of€the€offer€provide€for€termination€of€yourÏlease,€the€lease€would€be€terminated€upon€the€date€of€closing.óóÌÌà8 àà8 àPlease€consult€your€lease€for€the€manner€of€responding€to€thisÏnotice€and€let€me€know€what€you€wish€to€do.€€(EmphasisÏsupplied.)ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€March€19,€1995,€the€lessor€signed€a€modification€of€the€purchase€agreementÏcontaining€the€following:ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 à€€WHEREAS,€the€closing€date€as€provided€for€in€said€PurchaseÏAgreement€is€March€21,€1995€and€the€parties€desire€to€extendÏsaid€date;ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€NOW€THEREFORE,€for€and€in€consideration€of€the€premisesÏand€other€good€and€valuable€consideration€the€parties€agree€asÏfollows:ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€1.€€The€closing€date€shall€be€extended€to€and€shall€become€JuneÏ21,€1995€or€10€days€after€Summers€Lumber€and€TimberÏCompany€vacates€its€possession€of€the€subject€property,Ïwhichever€occurs€first.ÌÌÌÓÓà àOn€March€20,€1995,€counsel€for€lessor€wrote€lessee€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€Because€you€have€not€responded€within€the€required€sixty€daysÏof€her€December€16,€1994,€letter€notifying€you€of€a€bona€fideÏoffer€to€purchase€the€lease€premises,€she€plans€to€proceed€withÏthe€sale€of€the€property€to€William€J.€œPratt›,€Jr.,€the€offeror.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€Let€this€letter€serve€as€notice€that€the€lease€will€be€terminatedÏeffective€May€1,€1995,€and€you€should€vacate€the€premises€byÏJune€1,€1995.€€If€you€intend€to€remove€any€buildings,€structuresÏor€other€improvements€you€have€constructed,€you€should€do€soÏby€June€1,€1995.€€This€is€necessary€so€that€she€can€arrange€aÏclosing€with€the€purchaser.€€I€hope€that€this€can€be€accomplishedÏwithout€undue€difficulty.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€You€both€knew€since€the€inception€of€the€lease€that€thisÏsituation€could€and€would€likely€arise,€and€I€trust€that€you€willÏnot€take€any€action€that€will€jeopardize€this€unique€opportunity€orÏcause€her€any€undue€damages€or€expenses.€€Your€failure€toÏrespond€to€her€December€16€letter€has€already€necessitated€anÏextension€of€the€closing€date€with€the€purchaser.€€The€extensionÍof€the€closing€date€will€permit€you€to€remove€the€buildings€byÏJune€1,€1995,€if€you€desire,€however,€she€does€not€have€muchÏflexibility€beyond€that€date.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€Please€respond€in€writing€within€five€days€of€receipt€of€thisÏletter€regarding€whether€you€can€or€will€vacate€by€June€1,€1995.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€If€I€can€provide€additional€information,€please€advise.ÌÌà8 àÌÓÓà àOn€May€17,€1995,€the€lessor€filed€the€present€suit,€setting€out€the€foregoing€facts€andÏpraying:Ìà à1.€€For€an€injunction€requiring€lessees€to€vacate€by€June€21,€1995.Ìà à2.€€For€a€declaration€that€lessees€had€failed€to€exercise€their€right€of€first€refusal€toÏmatch€an€offer€to€purchase€the€property.Ìà à3.€€For€an€order€terminating€the€lease€on€May€1,€1995.Ìà à4.€€For€a€declaration€that€ð ðplaintiff€is€free€to€exercise€her€free€right€to€sell€the€real€estateÏthat€is€subject€to€the€Lease€Agreement€between€the€parties.ððÌà à5.€€Damages.ÌÌà àThe€lessees€answered€admitting€the€facts€but€denying€that€the€ð ðFirst€Refusalðð€agreementÏwas€intended€to€or€did€bind€them€to€vacate€the€premises€as€a€part€of€matching€a€purchase€order.ÌÌà àLessees€counter„claimed€for€a€declaratory€judgment€that:Ìà à1.€€The€failure€of€lessees€to€offer€to€purchase€did€not€result€in€a€termination€of€the€lease.Ìà à2.€€The€lease€remains€in€full€force€and€effect.ÌÌà àLessor€moved€for€partial€summary€judgment€ð ðon€the€issue€of€whether€the€lease€betweenÏthe€parties€is€terminated€upon€acceptance€by€the€plaintiff€of€a€bona€fide€offer€to€purchase€theÏdemised€premises.ððÌÌà àLessees€moved€for€partial€summary€judgment€that€the€lease€was€not€terminated€byÏfailure€of€lessees€to€purchase€the€property€under€the€right€of€first€refusal€clause€of€the€lease.ÌÌà àThe€Trial€Judge€entered€a€partial€summary€judgment€holding:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à.€.€.€€2.€€The€Right€of€First€Refusal€provision€of€the€AddendumÏto€Lease€Agreement€is€unambiguous.Ìà8 àà à3.€€That€provision€provides€in€pertinent€part:€ð ðUpon€Lesseeððs€failure€to€à8 àœà8 àà8 àmeet›€such€bona€fide€offer€within€60€days€afterÏnotice€thereof€from€the€Lessor,€the€Lessor€shallÏbe€free€to€sell€the€premises€or€portion€thereof€toÏsuch€third€person€in€accordance€with€the€termsÏand€conditions€of€his€offer.ððÌà8 àà8 à4.€€Under€the€unambiguous€language€of€this€Right€of€FirstÏRefusal€provision,€it€is€not€the€mere€making€of€an€offer€toÏpurchase€the€premises€conditioned€upon€termination€of€the€leaseÏwhich€would€terminate€the€defendantsðð/lesseesðð€leaseholdÏinterest.€€Rather,€it€is€the€consummation€of€a€sale€in€accordanceÏwith€the€terms€and€conditions€of€such€an€offer,€after€theÏdefendants/lessees€have€declined€to€exercise€their€right€of€firstÏrefusal,€which€would€serve€to€terminate€their€leasehold€interest.€ÏIn€the€event€such€a€sale€is€consummated,€defendantsðð/lesseesððÏleasehold€interest€would€terminate.€€In€the€event€such€a€sale€isÏnot€consummated,€the€defendantsðð/lesseesðð€leasehold€interestÏwould€not€terminate€and€would€remain€in€full€force€and€effect.€€ÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€only€issue€on€appeal€is€the€correctness€of€the€ruling€of€the€partial€judgment€of€theÏTrial€Court.ÌÌà àœOrdinarily,€a€sale›€of€leased€premises€does€not€release€the€tenant€from€his€obligation€orÏdeprive€him€of€his€leasehold.€€òòHughes€v.€œDonlon›,€óó149€Tenn.€506,€261€œS.W.›€960,€35€œA.L.R.›Ï506.ÌÌà àIn€the€absence€of€a€peculiar€provision€in€the€lease,€the€holder€of€an€enforceableÏleasehold€interest€has€an€unquestioned€right€to€attorn,€or€perform€the€duties€of€the€lessee€to€theÏpurchaser€of€the€property€as€lessor,€and€to€continue€to€occupy€the€premises€under€the€terms€ofÏthe€lease.€€51€œC.J.S.›€Landlord€and€Tenant€ðð22,€p.53€òòet€seq.óóÌÌà àCareful€scrutiny€of€the€original€lease€fails€to€disclose€any€provision€therein€whichÏwould€give€the€faintest€hint€that€it€would€be€terminated€by€the€sale€of€the€property€by€the€lessorÏor€the€failure€of€the€lessee€to€purchase€or€offer€to€purchase€the€property.ÌÌà àAn€equally€painstaking€examination€of€the€ð ðAddendum€to€Lease€Agreementðð€producesÏthe€same€negative€result.€€On€the€contrary,€the€whole€import€of€this€instrument€is€that€theÏlessees€desire€to€and€will€make€improvements€on€the€property€and€wish€to€perpetuate€their€useÏof€it.ÌÌà àParagraph€IV€of€the€Addendum,€quoted€above,€is€nothing€more€or€less€than€anÏopportunity€to€the€lessees€to€purchase€the€property,€if€it€becomes€available€for€purchase,€eitherÏto€avoid€payment€of€rent,€or€to€satisfy€their€normal€desire€to€have€permanent€occupancy€of€theÏland€which€they€proposed€to€improve.€€The€reason€for€the€sentence:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIn€the€event€of€a€sale€of€subject€property,€an€appraisal€will€beÏmade€by€both€lessor€and€lessee,ÌÌÓÓœÌis›€not€apparent,€but€it€is€not€inconsistent€with€the€intent€of€lessees€to€acquire€title€to€the€propertyÏfor€the€above€reasons.ÌÌà àPlaintiffððs€only€support€for€her€position€is€that€one€of€the€ð ðtermsðð€of€the€offer€of€theÏthird€party€was€termination€of€the€lease.€€Plaintiff€insists€that,€in€order€to€comply€with€theÏrequirement€of€Paragraph€IV€to€ð ðmeet€such€òòbona€fideóó€offer,ðð€lessees€must€ð ðterminate€the€lease.ðð€ÏThis€Court€cannot€agree.ÌÌà àThe€requirement€of€paragraph€IV€is€that€the€lessees€offer€whatever€the€third€party€hasÏoffered€in€terms€of€price€and€terms€of€payment.€€It€does€not€require€the€lessees€to€produce€thatÏwhich€the€third€party€has€not€offered€to€produce.€€The€provision€of€the€third€party€offerÏrequiring€termination€of€the€lease€did€not€require€the€third€party€to€terminate€the€lease.€€This€wasÏa€condition€to€be€performed€by€the€offeree,€the€lessor.€€Of€course,€this€could€not€be€done€by€theÏlessor€without€some€legal€ground.ÌÌà àAnother€reason€why€plaintiffððs€argument€cannot€be€accepted€is€that€there€is€no€evidenceÏthat€the€parties€had€a€meeting€of€the€minds€upon€the€subject€of€allowing€their€contract€to€beÏsubject€to€the€whims€of€others,€and€nothing€in€the€documents€evidence€such€a€meeting€of€mindsÏor€unity€of€intent.ÌÌà àNo€published€Tennessee€opinion€has€dealt€with€this€situation,€but€similar€cases€haveÏbeen€decided€in€other€states.ÌÌà àIn€òòEaton€v.€Fisk,€óó584€œN.Y.S›.œ2d›,€280;€154€Misc.œ2d›€266€(1992),€plaintiff€leased€a€stripÏof€œlakeshore›€to€defendants€for€the€duration€of€defendantððs€lives.€€Tenants€were€to€build€a€dockÏon€the€premises€in€lieu€of€the€first€five€years€rent€after€which€they€were€to€pay€$600€per€year.€ÏThe€lease€contained€the€following€provision:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àShould€the€landlord,€during€the€lease€term,€elect€to€sell€all€or€anyÏportion€of€the€leased€premises,€.€.€.€any€tenant€herein€shall€haveÏthe€right€of€first€refusal€to€meet€any€bona€fide€offer€of€sale€on€theÏsame€terms€and€conditions€of€such€offer.€€Upon€the€tenantsÏfailure€to€meet€such€bona€fide€offer€.€.€.€the€landlord€shall€be€freeÏto€sell€the€premises€.€.€.€in€accordance€with€the€terms€of€saidÏoffer.ÌÌÌÓÓThe€landlord€received€an€offer€conditional€upon€the€termination€of€the€lease€to€defendants,€whoÏdeclined€to€meet€the€offer.€€The€landlord€brought€action€to€terminate€the€lease€and€evict€theÏtenants.€€After€citing€a€number€of€authorities€on€both€sides€of€the€issue,€the€New€York€CourtÏheld:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€It€does€not€seem€reasonable€that€the€language€of€the€leaseÏwould€allow€the€plaintiff,€by€means€of€a€unilateral€agreementÏwith€a€third€party,€to€arguably€terminate€the€defendantsððÏleasehold€rights€immediately€after€the€construction€of€the€dock,Ïor€conversely,€for€the€defendants€to€have€the€unilateral€right€toÏterminate€a€lease€upon€a€mere€refusal€to€exercise€an€option€toÏpurchase€the€premises.€€Such€a€construction€of€the€clause€wouldÏappear€to€fly€in€the€face€of€the€contractual€rights€and€obligationsÏof€each€party.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€The€plaintiff€argues€that€the€words€ð ðin€accordance€with€theÏterms€and€conditions€of€his€offerðð€have€particular€significance€inÏthat,€since€the€proposed€purchaser€specifically€provided€in€hisÏoffer€that€it€was€subject€to€termination€of€the€lease,€theÏdefendants€are€thereby€bound.€€However,€it€is€not€reasonable€toÏassume€that€a€non„contractual€party€can,€by€such€language,Ïinterfere€with€the€defendantsðð€contractual€rights€under€the€lease.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€The€court€finds€that€the€language€in€the€disputed€clause€isÏunambiguous,€and€further€finds€that€the€refusal€of€the€defendantsÏto€exercise€their€right€to€purchase€does€not€terminate€theirÏleasehold€interest€in€the€premises.ÌÌòòEaton,€óó584€œN.Y.S.2d›€at€281.ÌÌÌÓÓà àòòSexton€v.€Nelsonóó,€228€œCal.App›.œ2d›€248,€39€œCal.Rptr›.€407€(1964)€was€an€action€forÏdeclaratory€judgment€upon€several€disputes€arising€under€a€lease.€€Included€in€the€opinion€ofÏthe€Appellate€Court€is€the€following:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€Plaintiff€did€not€appeal€from€the€judgment€but,€nevertheless,Ïcontends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€concluding€that€the€lease€wasÏnot€terminated€upon€the€failure€of€defendant€to€exercise€theÏoption€to€purchase€the€leased€premises,€the€terms€of€whichÏheretofore€have€been€set€forth;€that,€under€the€undisputedÏevidence€and€law€in€the€premises,€the€lease€terminated€at€the€timeÏplaintiff€had€an€opportunity€to€sell€the€leased€premises€and€theÏdefendant,€after€notice€of€this€fact,€did€not€exercise€his€option€toÏpurchase;€and,€for€this€reason,€the€judgment€declaring€the€leaseÏterminated€as€of€May€4,€1962€should€be€sustained.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€As€heretofore€noted,€the€plaintiffððs€contention€is€based€upon€theÏdecision€in€òòœGaretson›€v.€Hester,€óó57€œCal.App›.œ2d›€39,€133€P.œ2d›Ï863.€€However,€the€facts€in€the€cited€case€are€not€analogous€toÏthose€in€the€instant€case€and€the€decision€therein€is€not€applicableÏhere.€€The€option€provision€in€the€instant€lease€merely€gave€theÏlessee€a€first€option€to€purchase€in€the€event€the€lessors€were€ableÏto€sell€ð ðany€partðð€of€the€ranch.€€It€did€not€require€the€lessee€toÏpurchase,€nor€provide,€expressly€or€by€implication,€that€the€leaseÏshould€terminate€upon€a€sale€to€another.€€The€contention€inÏquestion€is€without€merit.ÌÌòòSexton,€óó39€œCal.Rptr›.,€at€416.ÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€òòGolden€Spread€Oil,€Inc.€v.€American€œPetrofina›€Co.€of€Texas,óó€œTex.Civ.App›.€1968,Ï431€œS.W.2d›€50,€plaintiff„lessor€sued€to€terminate€a€filling€station€lease€because€lessee€hadÏfailed€to€exercise€an€option€under€the€lease€to€purchase€on€the€same€terms€as€a€third€party.€€TheÏAppellate€Court€affirmed€dismissal€and€said:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€A€lease€will€be€most€strongly€construed€against€the€lessor.ÏòòœSirtex›€Oil€Industries,€Inc.€v.€œErigan›óó,€403€œS.W.2d›€784€(œSup.Ct›.)Ïand€the€many€cases€there€cited.€€Where€a€lease€contract€is€writtenÏin€plain,€clear€and€unambiguous€language€its€construction€is€aÏquestion€to€be€decided€by€the€court€and€not€by€a€jury.€€òòœWeil›€v.ÏAnn€Lewis€Shops,€Inc.,€óóœTex.Civ.App›.,€281€œS.W.2d›€651€(writÏœrefððd›).€€It€is€stated€in€òòœG.C.›€Murphy€Co.€v.€Lack,€óóœTex.Civ.App›.,Ï404€œS.W.2d›€853€(œn.r.e.›)€as€follows:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àð ðThe€courts€do€not€favor€forfeitures€and€unlessÏcompelled€to€do€so€by€language€that€will€admit€toÏno€other€construction,€forfeiture€will€not€beÏenforced.€€The€law€abhors€a€forfeiture.€€[CitingÏauthorities].€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àEquitable€relief€will€not€be€granted€in€declaring€aÏforfeiture,€for€only€the€plain€language€of€theÏcontract€will€permit€such€drastic€relief.ððÌÌà8 àà8 à€€Appellee€herein€certainly€had€a€lease€upon€the€property€hereÏinvolved€for€a€term€of€15€years€with€the€exclusive€right€toÏpurchase€if€he€desired€to€do€so,€but€was€under€no€obligation€toÏpurchase€if€he€did€not€care€to€do€so.€€That€was€nothing€moreÏthan€a€privilege€granted€to€the€appellee.€€There€was€nothing€inÏthe€lease€concerning€the€cancellation€of€the€lease€in€case€of€a€saleÏto€a€third€party.€€We€think€the€lease€is€plain,€clear€andÏunambiguous€and€the€trial€court€correctly€construed€the€fullÏmeaning€of€the€lease€contract.€.€.€.ÌÌòòGolden€Spread€Oil,€óó431€œS.W.2d›,€at€52,53.ÌÌÌÓÓà àIn€òòœGaretson›€v.€Hester,€óó57€œCal.App›.€39,€133€P.œ2d›€863€(1943),€mentioned€above,€theÏopinion€of€the€Court€states:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€.€.€.€€It€further€provided,€and€òòthis€provision€is€an€importantóóÏòòelement€of€the€controversyóó€in€this€action,€as€follows:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà àð ðIt€is€mutually€understood€and€agreed€that€òòthe€propertyóóÏòòcovered€by€this€lease€is€subject€to€saleóó;€however,€the€lessorÏagrees€that€in€the€event€of€an€offer€to€purchase€that€lessee€is€to€beÏgiven€first€opportunity€to€buy.€€(Emphasis€supplied.)ÌÌÓÓThe€owner€received€an€offer€to€buy€conditioned€on€cancellation€of€the€lease€and€sued€forÏtermination€when€lessee€would€not€exercise€his€option.ÌÌà àThe€Appellate€Court€said:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€The€issue€involved€on€this€appeal€is€whether€or€not€the€partiesÏto€the€leases€intended€by€the€language€used€that€the€leases€shouldÏbe€terminated€when€an€offer€of€purchase€was€received€and€theÏlessee€refused€to€take€advantage€of€the€option€and€purchase€theÏproperty€at€the€price€named€in€the€offer.Ìœ›à8 àà8 à€.€.€.€The€lease€clearly€provided,€and€it€is€clear€that€the€partiesÏhad€in€mind€the€fact€that€the€property€was€ð ðsubject€to€sale,ðð€at€allÏtimes.€€It€was€not€the€sale€which€was€to€terminate€the€leases,€butÏa€bona€fide€ð ðoffer€to€purchaseðð€and€the€lessee€was€to€be€givenÏthe€first€opportunity€to€buy€when€such€an€offer€was€made.€€.€.€.€ÏObviously,€the€property€was€subject€to€sale€without€the€insertionÍof€any€such€clause.€€The€lessor€at€anytime€had€the€right€to€sellÏthe€property€subject,€of€course,€to€the€lease,€and€the€effect€of€theÏsale€would€have€been€merely€to€substitute€the€vendee€to€all€of€theÏrights€of€the€original€lessor.€€òòUpton€v.€œToth›,€óó€36€œCal.App›.œ2d›Ï679,€684,€98€P.œ2d›€515.€€The€clause€must,€therefore,€have€anÏimportant€intended€meaning.€€The€placing€of€the€option€in€thisÏclause€indicated€very€clearly€that€it€was€the€intention€of€theÏparties,€and€insisted€upon€by€the€lessees,€the€œappellates›€herein,Ïthat€the€lessees€be€protected€in€the€event€of€the€sale€and€be€givenÏthe€first€opportunity€to€purchase.€€If€it€was€not€intended€by€theÏparties€that€a€bona€fide€offer€to€purchase€with€a€subsequentÏrefusal€by€lessees€to€purchase€should€terminate€the€leases,€thereÏwould€have€been€no€occasion€whatsoever€for€this€sort€of€anÏoption.€€If€the€purpose€of€the€clause€was€merely€to€grant€anÏoption€to€the€lessees€to€buy€the€property€during€the€life€of€theÏleases,€it€would€not€have€been€coupled€with€the€clause€reservingÏthe€property€for€sale.€€The€two€expressions€together€clearlyÏindicate€that€it€was€intended€by€all€parties€that€the€sale€of€the€landÏwould€terminate€the€leases.€€In€no€other€way€can€the€presence€ofÏthe€clause€be€explained.€€It€certainly€is€a€reasonable€constructionÏto€believe€that€the€parties€intended€to€and€did€create€a€conditionÏupon€which€a€termination€of€the€leases€could€be€predicated.€Ï[Citing€authorities.]ÌÌòòœGaretson›,€óó133€P.œ2d›,€at€œ865„66.̛̜ÌÓÓ›à àIn€òòPipkin€v.€œConnolly›,€óó167€Mont.œ2d›,€538€P.œ2d›€347€(1975),€a€farm€lease€provided:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà8 àð ðThe€Landlords€[Pipkins]€agreed€to€give€TenantsÏ[œConnollys›]€the€right€to€meet€any€offer€to€buy€theÏabove€described€real€estate€and€Landlords€agreeÏto€accept€Tenantsðð€offer€which€does€meet€anÏoffer,€or€offers,€to€buy€from€any€sourceÏwhatsoever.ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àð ð€*€*€*ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àð ð€*€*€*€The€Tenants€recognize€Landlordsðð€right€toÏsell€the€above€described€real€estate€during€theÏterm€of€this€lease€or€any€future€lease€providingÏthat€Tenants€be€given€the€rights€hereinbeforeÏmentioned.ððÌÌòòPipkin,óó€538€P.œ2d›,€at€348„49.ÌÌÌÓÓà àLessees€failed€to€match€an€offer€by€a€third€party€and€the€landlord€sued€to€terminate€theÏlease.ÌÌà àThe€Appellate€Court€terminated€the€lease€and€said:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à€€The€lease€was€drawn€by€the€attorney€for€œConnollys›.€€The€termsÏof€the€lease€when€ambiguous€will€be€construed€most€stronglyÏagainst€him€whose€words€they€are.€€òòœBickford›€v.€œKirwin›,€óó30ÏMont.€1.,€75€P.€518.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€The€lease€clause€allowing€the€sale€of€the€farmland€and€givingÏlessees€the€right€of€first€refusal€is,€at€best,€incomplete€as€it€relatesÏto€the€problem€here.€€If€all€Pipkins€wanted€to€do€was€to€be€ableÏto€sell€their€farmland,€subject€to€the€leasehold,€there€€would€haveÏbeen€no€need€for€the€clause.€€œConnollys›€stated€they€included€theÏclause€because€Pipkins€demanded€it,€even€though€in€theirÏopinion€it€was€not€necessary.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà8 à€€In€òòœLunke›€v.€œEgeland›,€óó46€Mont.€403,€410,€128€P.€610,€612,Ïwhile€construing€an€agricultural€lease€which€contained€additionalÏelements,€this€Court€did€reach€the€problem€of€the€effect€of€aÏclause€giving€the€lessor€the€right€to€sell€and€the€lessee€the€right€ofÏfirst€refusal.€€The€Court€held:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àð ðThere€was€no€necessity€of€reserving€the€right€toÏsell€if€such€sale€was€not€to€affect€the€lease.Ï[Lessor]€had€such€right€in€any€event.ððÌÌà8 àà8 à€€The€California€Supreme€Court€in€òòœGaretson›€v.€Hester,€óó57ÏœCal.App›.œ2d›€39,€133€P.œ2d›€863,€864,€865,€construed€òòthisóóÏòòlanguage€of€the€lease€involved€thereóó:ÌÌà8 àà8 àà8 àð ðððIt€is€mutually€understood€and€agreed€that€òòtheóóÏòòproperty€covered€by€this€lease€is€subject€to€saleóó;Ïhowever,€the€lessor€agrees€that€in€the€event€of€anÏoffer€to€purchase€that€lessee€is€to€be€given€firstÏopportunity€to€buy.ðððð€(Emphasis€supplied.)ÌÌòòPipkin,€óó538€P.œ2d›,€at€349„50.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€Court€agrees€with€the€reasoning€of€the€New€York€Court€in€òòEaton€v.€Fisk,€óóand€theÏTexas€Court€in€òòGolden€Spread€Oil€Co.€v.€American€œPetrofina›€Co.€of€Texas,€supra,€óóand€hasÍdistinguished€the€holdings€of€the€California€Court€in€òòœGaretson›€v.€Hester,€óóand€its€progeny,Ïòòsupra€óóby€the€fact€that€the€lease€in€the€present€case€did€not€contain€the€words,€ð ðthe€propertyÏcovered€by€this€lease€is€subject€to€sale.ððÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€reversed€and€vacated€and€the€cause€is€remanded€toÏthe€Trial€Court€for€entry€of€an€order€and€proceedings€in€conformity€with€this€opinion.€€Costs€ofÏthis€appeal€are€taxed€against€the€plaintiff„appellee.ÌÌà àReversed€and€Remanded.ÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHENRY€F.€TODDÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPRESIDING€JUDGE,€MIDDLE€SECTIONÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,€JUDGE