Rodney Alexander v. Estate of Steve Hobart and Nick Hobart

Rapid City, South Dakota civil litigation lawyers represented the parties in a breach of contract dispute.<br>
<br>
Rodney Alexander and Steve Hobart entered into an agreement giving Alexander a right of first refusal to purchase Steve's cattle and to have Steve's national forest livestock grazing permit transferred to him. They, along with Steve's son Nick, later signed an addendum clarifying that the agreement extended to Nick.0F[1] Several years later, Nick sold the cattle, and the permit was transferred to a third party without the Hobarts first notifying Alexander and giving him the opportunity to exercise the right of first refusal. Alexander sued the Hobarts for breach of contract and fraud. Steve and Nick moved for judgment on the pleadings alleging the contract was void for impossibility of performance or, alternatively, that it was for an unlawful object. They also claimed the right of first refusal is an unreasonable restraint on the alienation of property. The circuit court granted the motion on the grounds of impossible performance. Alexander appeals, asserting that the circuit court erred in concluding the contract was void. We reverse the circuit court's order and judgment on the pleadings. Additionally, through notice of review, Nick seeks review of the circuit court's ruling that the right of first refusal is not an unreasonable restraint on alienation of property. <br>
<br>
* * *<br>
<br>
Legal issue Is a right of first refusal contract for grazing permits void due to impossibility of performance under applicable federal regulations?<br>
<br>
CONTRACT LAW. RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL AND IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE. The case addresses whether a contract granting a right of first refusal was void for impossibility of performance, specifically whether the transfer of a grazing permit, governed by federal regulations that require United States Forest Service approval, constitutes an impossibility of performance when the contract does not mandate direct transfer by the permit holder.<br>
<br>
CONTRACT LAW. UNREASONABLE RESTRAINT ON ALIENATION. The court evaluates whether a right of first refusal constitutes an unreasonable restraint on the alienation of property by examining factors such as the duration of the restraint, the purpose of the agreement, and whether the price term was fixed or established through binding arbitration.<br>
<br>
Key Phrases Right of first refusal. Unreasonable restraint on alienation. Impossibility of performance. U.S. Forest Service grazing permit. Breach of contract.

Affirmed