Oral Promise of an Exclusive Not Reflected in Lease

What Happened: “We would have never signed the lease without the landlord’s promise to evict the existing chiropractor tenant and make us the lone and exclusive chiropractic clinic in the shopping center,” claimed the tenant.

The landlord denied making any such promise and contended that the tenant knew about the other clinic all along but signed the lease anyway.

Decision: The Florida federal court sided with the landlord and dismissed the tenant’s fraud claims.

Reasoning: The alleged oral promise completely contradicted the clear and unambiguous terms of the lease, specifically: (a) the landlord’s promise not to lease space in the center to another chiropractic clinic “after the date of this Lease;” and (b) the language at the end of the purported exclusive indicating that the “foregoing provisions shall not apply to present tenants at the Shopping Center.”

The best evidence of what the parties to a lease intended is the actual language of the agreement they signed, reasoned the court.  

• Brianna Chiropractic LLC v. Jamestown Village Commons, L.P.: 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65237