Jon and Marsha are suing Boren Deal for the enforcement of their real estate contract. There are several defenses to contract enforcement, however, very few defenses would be viable options for the seller. The real estate contract does not contain illegal subject matter, nor was the contract obtained illegally (i.e. fraud or duress). While there are several mistakes within the contract documents, the lawsuit itself has nothing to do with these mistakes, but rather one party trying to get out of their side of the contract. The one defense the seller may have is a lack of consideration in the form of an Earnest Money Deposit check. Earnest money is generally used as a tool to preserve a sales deal and is a sign of good will. However, earnest money is not required for sales transactions. The only problem here is that the buyers stated that they had delivered the Earnest Deposit check to their agent, but Marsha was without her check book that day and promised to deliver it as soon as possible. The case scenario never states whether this promise was ever followed through. If Marsha did indeed deliver the check to her agent, all is well, but if she failed to …show more content…
She would likely ask a judge to cancel the contract made between herself and the buyers and award her with ownership of the property. The only way a judge would award her with this remedy would be if he felt that the contract errors and lack of promised consideration, in the form of an Earnest Money Deposit check, were significant enough to undo the contract and its obligations. From a third party bystander’s point of view, at the time the contract was signed by the seller, she appeared to have full intent to complete the sale of her home. A judge would likely ignore the mistakes made in the contract and award ownership of the home to the rightful owner as outlined in the REPC and
The defense’s argument that Abigail’s offer did not specify a particular a purebred was not upheld by the jury. Alex thought that he was getting a Chihuahua, or at least a purebred dog. “Such a misrepresentation is one that is likely to induce a reasonable person to assent to a contract” (Twomey & Jennings, p. 273). By delivering a dog that did not reasonably fit within the slightest specifications of a purebred, Abigail blatantly disregarded the contract between she and Alex. Her ad stated that she was selling “purebred toy breed puppies”, not a mix bred (mutt) and definitely not a full size dog, which is what Alex later found out to be the dog he received. The plaintiff was in fact harmed by Abigail’s actions in the form of having paid money in good faith that she would uphold her half of the agreement. The fact that Alex accepted the puppy from Abigail and now has an attachment to the dog, does not excuse Abigail’s actions, nor does it acquit her of any wrongdoing. The plaintiff has established the four elements of
This case study examines various real estate contracts – the Real Estate Purchase Contract (REPC) and two addendums labeled Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No. 2 – pertaining to the sale of 1234 Cul-de-sac Lane in Orem, Utah. The buyers in this contract are 17 year old Jon D’Man and 21 year old Marsha Mello; the seller is Boren T. Deal. The first contract created was Jon and Marsha’s offer to purchase Boren’s house. This contract was created using the RESC form, which was likely provided by their real estate agent as it is the required form for real estate transactions according to Utah state law. The seller originally listed the house on a Multiple Listing Service (MLS); Jon and Marsha agreed that the asking price was too high for the neighborhood (although we are not given the actual listing price), and agreed to offer two-hundred and seven-thousand dollars ($207,000) and an Earnest Money Deposit of five-thousand dollars ($5,000). Additionally, the buyers requested that the seller pay 3% which includes the title insurance and property taxes. After the REPC form was drafted, the two addendums were created. Addendum No. 1 is from the seller back to the buyer, and Addendum No. 2 is the buyer’s counteroffer to the seller.
Aldo shipped 10 refrigerators to Rafael pursuant to a sales contract under which title to the goods and risk of loss would pass to Rafael upon delivery to Fleet Railroad. The agreed price was $5,000. When the refrigerators were delivered to Rafael, he found they were damaged. An estimate for repairing them showed it would cost up to $1,000, and an expert opinion was to the effect that they were defective when shipped. Rafael put in a claim to Aldo, which Aldo rejected. Rafael then wrote to Aldo, “I don’t like to get into a despite of this nature. I am enclosing my check for $4,000 in full payment of the shipment.” Aldo did not reply, but he cashed the check and then sued Rafael for the $1,000 balance. May he recover? Explain.
Jones was party to the contract and mortgage together with Mrs Jones as surety for her husband, even though Mrs Jones was the actual owner of the property. This produced a legal consequence as it affected the appellants with a conduct on the part of the husband in relation to his wife which raised equities in her favour against the indication of a mortgage. The husband exercised undue influence on Mrs Jones to procure her signature to the mortgage which consisted of no consideration. The plaintiff brought proceedings against the defendant upon a contract to pay interest and principal contained in the mortgage over the property at Walkerville owned by Mrs Jones. It was understood that Mrs Jones executed the mortgage without understanding the effect of the contract and presumed various false misrepresentations. She argued that the mortgage which she s...
Riley (2008), the New York Supreme Court was deciding the legality of terminating a contractual agreement purchasing an apartment. The apartment, owned by Riley, was sold to Shillington with the promise that a large wall would be removed upon purchase. After paying the down payment, Shillington was informed by a broker that the wall could not be legally removed from the home as it was previously promised to be. Shillington took action to terminate the contact and requested his down payment back from Ackley due to negligent misrepresentation of the property. The court cited Stambovsky v. Ackley in its decision that a contractual agreement may be terminated if the seller of a property leaves out information that can lessen the value of the property being sold. In this case, the wall took up 200 extra square feet of space and its existence decreased the value of the property. The court applied this information but the case was dismissed and a settlement between the parties was reached.
However, the fourth element, which is "legal object," may not be satisfied between Sam and the chain store because there was nothing in writing, nothing was “drawn.” An oral promise would make the contract invalid if the completion of that promise will take more than a year from the date of agreement. However, if the chain store has written proof confirming Sam 's promise, for example, advertisements, invoices that the store only prepares in the regular course of business after an oral promise for a product delivery has been made, a court may consider Sam 's oral promise legally binding. Then it would be considered a "primary obligation" (since there was a debt incurred in anticipation of the sale of his invention at their stores). In that event, the contract does not need to be in writing to be enforced since primary obligations are not within the statute of frauds. So if the chain store does not get their 1000
A Theory of Justice is the magnum opus of 20th century social contract theorist and political philosopher, John Rawls. A bit of background into this work is that social contract theory had fallen out of favor with political scientists and philosophers since the last 18th century, with the success of the American Revolution and the apparent triumph of John Locke and Democracy. However, with the advent of modern globalization, the emergence of America as a superpower, but the growing concern of socio-economic disparity necessitated a revisiting of the social contract, what it means, how societies and governments were best constructed.
My father started, owned and operated a tire business there for 45 years. During the latter years, he depended strictly on out of town business, because the locals prevented county vehicles, school vehicles, and any other county business to be done there. Nevertheless, the business did very well. In 1993, my father had double knee replacement surgery. The business fell behind a few payments on a mortgage loan from a local bank. My father had done business with that bank since 1951. After very few months, the bank began foreclosure proceedings. My father immediately sold a large inventory of tires, raised $10,000. He offered the bank the $10,000 to pay the arrearage plus a few payments in advance to show good faith. Every possible attempt was made to satisfy the bank, but everything was turned down except the $50,000 required to pay the loan off in full.
The defendant (Dorris Reed) bought a house from the plaintiff (Robert King) and the house was the place of a murder that happened 10 years before. Reed nor the real-estate agent had no knowledge of this murder and Reed discovered the facts of the murder from a neighbor after the sale happened. King was well aware of the murder and recognized that it would impact the home’s market value when it was up for sale. Reed gave $76,000 for the home, although it was worth $65,000 due to the murder. Reed sued King along with the real estate for rescission and damages.
...useless car to a junk yard to recover some loss, but the difference of the re-sale of the junk-car would be a significant loss. Though there were no adequate assurances to the contract, anticipatory repudiation is the only probable remedy for Jack. However, the outcome would weigh on the predominant factor test, which is met because Tom is covered as a merchant because he is operating in his usual daily business, and Jack is the buyer. The sole purpose of the contract was for Tom to sell Jack a car, and for Jack to buy a car from Tom. The UCC, though less stringent than the statute of frauds, does effectively regulate commercial transfers allowing the free market to operate without diminishing the integrity of trade.
Preparation for the negotiation took around forty minutes. The contract was breached by us (Wood Crafters) and there was no supporting document. Our options were bankruptcy or selling the house. The opening offer was made by Viking. Wood Crafters could see that Viking felt that they had the power/rights which led to the distributive approach. Initially, Viking was pushing for Wood Crafters to pay the over-run, the loan and the rent but Wood Crafters pushed against it. Wood Crafters argument was that the over-run project was approved by Viking secretary, therefore, Wood Crafters offer was to file a bankruptcy which believed to be the best option at the time. By filing a bankruptcy, Viking would not be
Land is probably one of the biggest advantages that God has bestowed upon us human beings. However, there are other times that this benefit can cause problems for us which then involve the help of our legal system e.g. interference in the enjoyment of land, civil disputes on land, domestic disputes on land etc.
The issue in this case is whether there is a legally binding contract between Roland and Bernie. The things that needs to be considered is whether there is an agreement between Roland and Bernie. If there is an offer and acceptance, then there is an existence of agreement. According to Section 2(a) of the Contract Act 1950, offer can be defines as when one person implies his/her willingness to another in order to acquire their consent. (Abdullah et al, 2011) The person who make the offer is known as ‘offeror’ or ‘promisor’. (Lee and Detta, 2009) An offer can be made in the method of orally, by conduct, writing or by the mixture of these forms. An offer must require an effective communication with offeree. The formation of contract when offeree accepted the proposal. (Dass, 2005)
A contract is an agreement between two parties in which one party agrees to perform some actions in return of some consideration. These promises are legally binding. The contract can be for exchange of goods, services, property and so on. A contract can be oral as well as written and also it can be part oral and part written but it is useful to have written contract otherwise issues can be created in future. But both the written as well as oral contract is legally enforceable. Also if there is a breach of contract, there are certain remedies for that which are discussed later in the assignment. There are certain elements which need to be present in a contract. These elements are discussed in the detail in the assignment. (Clarke,
It was my dream to always own my own home. My wife and I set out to purchase a house on our own. In our process of trying to be first-time homeowners, we looked at so many houses until we were about ready to say maybe now is not the time. One day we were out driving not really looking and stumbled upon a house which we thought would be our home. We got the information we needed and made the call to see the house. The house was a newly built house with all the amenities my wife wanted. Not knowing the ends and the outs of purchasing a house, we thought that it could not be that hard. We went all in for this house, our house. The builder/realtor was not willing to negotiate the asking price of the house. We were even expected to pay closing cost. The contract included a lot of costs which we also found out were non-negotiable. Had we been represented by a agent, things may have gone a little differently. We were then told that there was another contract on the house and it would be taken. We lost the house we considered or thought would be our home.