Court Opinion

ID: 9742814
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 21:20:56.680822+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:36.800082
License: Public Domain

JUSTICE HOFFMAN, dissenting: The majority acknowledges that a contract of indefinite duration is not deemed perpetual and terminable at will if the agreement provides for termination upon the occurrence of a specific "objective event,” a proposition with which I agree. I dissent in this case, however, because I do not agree with the notion that a specified breach on the part of one party to a contract giving rise to the other party’s right to terminate the agreement is not considered an "objective event” rendering the contract sufficiently definite in duration to remove it from the status of an agreement terminable at will. Relying upon the holding in R.J.N. Corp. v. Connelly Food Products, Inc., 175 Ill. App. 3d 655, 529 N.E.2d 1184 (1988), the majority holds that "where one party has the option or decision to either comply with the contract or not, the duration of the contract is indefinite and terminable at will.” 288 Ill. App. 3d at 894. R.J.N. does not support such a broad proposition of law, and my research reveals no other reported Illinois case that does. To be sure, R.J.N. holds that a contract provision providing for termination by one party when the other party elects to cease performing "cannot be construed as an 'objective event,’ the occurrence of which terminates the contract thereby making it sufficiently definite in duration” so as to avoid being termed perpetual, and as a result, terminable at will. R.J.N., 175 Ill. App. 3d at 660. When, however, a contract of indefinite duration is terminable upon the occurrence of some event, such as a future breach, neither party may terminate at will. First Commodity Traders v. Heinhold Commodities, 766 F.2d 1007 (7th Cir. 1985). In this case, as the majority points out, section 4.01 of plaintiff Jespersen’s sales distribution agreement with Trim-Line granted Trim-Line the right to terminate the contract upon, among other events, Jespersen’s "breach of any term or condition of the agreement” or "failure to make payment to Trim-Line within ninety (90) days of shipment.” These are cognizable events upon which termination may occur, and consequently, I believe that the subject contract is not perpetual and terminable at will, even in the absence of a specified termination date. See Peters v. Health & Hospitals Governing Comm’n, 91 Ill. App. 3d 1104, 1107, 415 N.E.2d 653 (1980), rev’d on other grounds, 88 Ill. 2d 316, 430 N.E.2d 1128 (1981); First Commodity Traders, 766 F.2d at 1012.