Case 14-3

Case 14-3

Facts: Defendant attempted to extend a lease by faxing a renewal letter on the last day of the six-month notification period. Records confirmed that the fax was delivered successfully, but the plaintiff denied receiving the fax. Plaintiff refused to renew the fax and demanded that the defendant vacate the premises at the end of the term. Defendant refused so plaintiff filed an action for forcible entry.

Issue: Whether a fax or delivery of a written notice to renew a commercial lease is sufficient to exercise the timely renewal option of the lease.

Rationale: Kelly Moore's use of the fax served the same function and the same purpose as the two methods suggested by the lease and it was transmitted before the expiration of the deadline to renew.
Kelly-Moore also asserts that the lease specified that time was of the essence and that faxing the notice was the functional equivalent of personal delivery because it provided that virtually instantaneous communication.

Conclusion: Under these facts, we hold that the faxed or facsimile delivery of the written notice to renew the commercial lease was sufficient to exercise timely the renewal option of the lease. The mailbox rule: an acceptance is valid when it is placed in the mailbox. Mailbox rule has been expanded to apply to some faxes.

We agree because a fax is just as sufficient as mail and it is a form of instant communication.

Our Group Members:
Jennifer Ix
Christina Erny
Jimmy Thomas
Julian Strickland
Nick Kostielney