Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Store, Inc.

Facts

On April 6, 1956, the store ran a newspaper ad in Minneapolis. It announced for Saturday at 9 a.m. sharp three brand new fur coats, worth to $100.00, first come first served, at $1 each. On April 13 it ran a second ad for the next Saturday. It listed two pastel mink scarfs selling for $89.50 and one black lapin stole, worth $139.50, at $1.00 each, again first come first served. On each Saturday, Lefkowitz was the first to reach the proper counter. He demanded the coat and the stole and said he was ready to pay the $1 sale price. The store refused both times. The first time it said a "house rule" meant the offer was for women only and it would not sell to men. The second time it said Lefkowitz knew the house rules. The ads said nothing about any such restriction. The trial court refused to award the value of the coats, because their value was speculative. The only evidence of value was the ad's own words about what they were worth. It found the value of the stole was established.

Issues

1. Was the store's newspaper ad for the lapin stole an offer that Lefkowitz could accept, or only an invitation to make an offer?
2. Could the store refuse to sell to Lefkowitz because of a women-only house rule that its ad never mentioned?

Holding

The store's ad for the lapin stole was a clear, definite and explicit offer. Lefkowitz, the first to appear and tender the stated price, accepted it and was entitled to performance. The store could not impose its women-only house rule after acceptance.