Barta entered into a written contract to buy the K&K Pharmacy, located in a local shopping center. Included in the contract was a provision stating "this Agreement shall be contingent upon Buyer’s ability to obtain a new lease from Landlord for the premises presently occupied by Seller. In the event Buyer is unable to obtain a lease satisfactory to Buyer, this Agreement shall be null and void." Barta planned to sell "high-traffic" grocery items, such as bread, milk, and coffee, to attract customers to his drugstore. A grocery store in the shopping center, however, already held the exclusive right to sell grocery items. Barta, therefore, could not obtain a leasing agreement meeting his approval. Barta refused to close the sale. In a suit by K&K Pharmacy against Barta for breach of contract, who will prevail? Explain. Under the facts presented in Case Problem 13 and the reasoning of the Supreme Court of New Jersey in the Silvestri case, the clause "In the event Buyer is unable to obtain a lease satisfactory to Buyer, this Agreement shall be null and void" is most likely to be interpreted as a ______________ satisfaction clause and thus Barta need only be _______dissatisfied with the lease agreement. Thus, in a suit by K&K Pharmacy against Barta, would Barta most likely win.
A. Yes
B. No