Marten v. Staab

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reasoning that even if auctioneer accepted the high bid, “his acceptance would not be enough to form a contract for the sale of the lands” where auction’s terms and conditions reserved right for approval by probate court
• adopting prevailing common-law rule “that ‘all auctions are presumed to be with reserve’” absent contrary express terms (quoting Cuba v. Hudson & Marshall, 445 S.E.2d 386, 387 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994))
• “[A]ll auctions are presumed to be with reserve unless they are expressly stated to be without reserve.” (cleaned up)
• “A third-party beneficiary’s rights depend upon, and are measured by, the terms of the contract between the promisor and promisee.”
• “In order to determine whether a contract was formed at the auction, it is necessary to identify the type of auction that occurred.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).