Cain Shoes, Inc. v. Gunn

I agree that this case should be reversed, but I perceive no purpose to be served by a new trial generally.

The trial court prepared and filed a comprehensive, written memorandum decision, in which the following statements are contained:

*385“On July 14, 1960 the parties to this action signed a written lease for a generally understood part of the projected building and Richard J. Gunn promised an opening date in late October, 1960. Under the prior oral understanding, an opening date of September 1 had been agreed upon and the July and August shoe deliveries were contracted for an opening on that…