Court Opinion

ID: 9493365
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:06:06.928671+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:55:48.145821
License: Public Domain

GILMAN, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I agree with the majority’s ultimate conclusion that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants. In my view, however, the defendants are entitled to judgment solely because, as ably explained by the majority, there was no breach of the contract under the peculiar circumstances of this case.
Despite my view that there was no breach, I am of the opinion that a conditional contract is still a “lawful contract” for the purposes of T.C.A. § 47-50-109. The contract between Stinson and HCCA did not cease to exist when the condition went unsatisfied; rather, the valid agreement simply was not consummated because of the unmet condition.