In Griffith v. Clear Lakes Trout, where a dispute arose over "market size" trout, the court held that the buyer (Clear Lakes) had the right to expect the seller to grow the trout to a larger size than he had been doing.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

In Griffith v. Clear Lakes Trout, the court held that the term "market size" was ambiguous and that there was no agreement for the seller to grow the trout to a larger size than what was considered market size at the time of the contract.

In Griffith V