Ohio Supreme Court, 1978

Karas v. Brogan

Ohio Supreme Court · Decided July 19, 1978 · Brown, Celebrezze, Herbert, Locher, Neill, Sweeney

55 Ohio St. 2d 128; 378 N.E.2d 470; 9 Ohio Op. 3d 107; 1978 Ohio LEXIS 627

Cases that cite this one

18 later published cases cite this decision.

Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Buell (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2015)
Jones v. City of Cleveland (District Court, N.D. Ohio 2020)
Monroe Excavating, Inc. v. DJD&C Dev., Inc. (Ohio Ct. App. 2011)
Goldfarb v. the Robb Report, Inc. (Ohio Ct. App. 1991)
French v. Ascent Resources-Utica, L.L.C. (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2022)
Browne v. Artex Oil Co. (Slip Opinion) (Ohio 2019)
Eisenbarth v. Reusser (Ohio Ct. App. 2014)
Rulli v. Rulli Bros., Unpublished Decision (7-21-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
Adams v. Doughtie (Portsmouth County Circuit Court 2003)
Gresser v. Hotzler (Minn. Ct. App. 2000)
Suitts v. First SEC. Bank of Idaho, NA (Idaho Ct. App. 1993)
Foster v. Ohio State University (Ohio Ct. App. 1987)
Eric Petroleum Corp. v. Ascent Resources-Utica, L.L.C. (Ohio Ct. App. 2024)
Sellers, Jr. v. Anthem, Inc. (District Court, District of Columbia 2022)
Oh Bur. of Workers' Comp. v. Plumb, Unpublished Decision (3-14-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
Bureau of Workers' Comp. v. Plumb, Unpublished Decision (3-14-2005) (Ohio Ct. App. 2005)
Metal Craft Docks v. Richlak, Unpublished Decision (1-17-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)
State Bureau of Workers' Comp. v. Plumb, Unpublished Decision (10-6-2003) (Ohio Ct. App. 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The rule that acceptance must meet and correspond with the offer in every respect in order for an offer and acceptance to constitute a contract ordinarily presents a question as to whether there is in fact a material variance between the acceptance and the offer rather than any issue as to what principle of contract law applies. Burkhead v. Farlow (1966), 266 N. C. 595, 146 S. E. 2d 802.

Here, the trial court found that the offer specifically promised a title “free and clear of all liens and encumbrances” and that the oil lease which the acceptor referred to in his acceptance did not involve a facial qualification of the acceptor’s assent to the terms of the offer.

Since an oil lease is an encumbrance,* its removal or release would be required under the express language of such offer, and so the additional language cannot be the basis of a conclusion that the acceptance contained a fatal material variance.

Since the majority Court of Appeals opinion reversing the trial court decision turns purely upon the adverse of this proposition, its judgment is reversed.

Judgment reversed.

O’Neill, C. J., Herbert, Celebrezze, P. Brown, Sweeney and Locher, JJ., concur. W. Brown, J., concurs in the judgment.

See Hale v. Plaine (1863), 14 Ohio St. 417; Tenbusch v. L. K. N. Realty Co. (1958), 107 Ohio App. 133, 137 and the numerous authorities there cited. See, also, 20 American Jurisprudence 2d 653, Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions, Section 89.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.