Appellants’ buyers purchased a small mom-and-pop gas station/convenience store from a Mr. Lowe. One of the appellants’ claims is that the sales contract was unconscionable. Appellants’ unconscionability argument is twofold: (1) that the value of the business was substantially less than what Appellants paid: and (2) that Mr. Lowe misled Appellants as to the income to be generated from the business. The trial court found there was no unconscionability. But is unconscionability an appropriate concept which may be applied to a UCC contract? See Lowe v. Smith Court of Appeals of Tennessee, At Nashville August 16, 2016, Session; September 19, 2016, Filed No. M2015-02472-COA-R3-CV Reporter 2016 Tenn. App. LEXIS 689 *; 90 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 1040
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"
