May 17, 2014

Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store - 22 Ill.251 Minn. 188, 86 N.W.2d 689 (1957)

FACTS: The store published an ad in the paper.  Lefkowitz was the first person at the store the next day to respond to the ad but the store refused to sell him the item.  The store claimed that it had a house rule to allow only women to purchase a Lapin stole.

ISSUE: Can the advertiser change the conditions at any time?

HOLDING: No

RATIONALE: the offer was clear and explicit and left no room for negotiations.  The advertisement also made no mention of a house rule to restrict the sale.  Arbitrary conditions cannot be imposed after acceptance.

DISPOSITION: Affirmed