Contracts Practice Exam
Bob v. Alex
Was there an Offer from Alex to Bob on February 1st ?
An offer is an outward manifestation of intent to be bound by contractual agreement requiring definite and certain terms that are communicated to the offeree.
Bob will assert that when Alex mailed him a letter offering him “Oceanhaven” for the May-June season that Alex did this act with a present contractual intent in mind.
Further, the facts stipulate that Alex identified the terms as “same terms as last year” which implies both parties are aware of the terms.
Lastly, given that Alex asked Bob to respond within a week, implies that he sent Bob an offer to lease Oceanhaven for the season.
Was there an indirect revocation of the offer on February 4th?
The knowledge by an offeree from a reliable source that offeror can not perform. It requires acts inconsistent with the contract.
The facts assert that Bob learned about Oceanhaven no longer being available on February 4th. Further, Bob heard this information from his real estate agent. Since his real estate agent is probably in the business of knowing what properties are available for season rentals, this appears to be a reliable source. Moreover, the news the real estate person shared was that Oceanhaven was rented to someone else for 6 months, effective March 1st. Accordinly, Oceanhaven would no longer be available from May through June. Because of this, the offeror can no longer perform. Lastly, since the person who is renting Oceanhave is not affiliated with Bob, it is reasonable to say that the acts are inconsistent with the terms of the offer.
Did Bob accept Alex’s offer on February 5th?
An acceptance is an unequivocal assent to the terms of the offer. A bilateral contract requires a return promise while a unilateral contract requires complete performance.
According to the facts, Bob wrote Alex on February 5th stating “I’ll take Oceanhaven per your leeter of February 1st. Being that Bob accepted Alex’s terms
Was there an Offer from Alex to Bob on February 1st ?
An offer is an outward manifestation of intent to be bound by contractual agreement requiring definite and certain terms that are communicated to the offeree.
Bob will assert that when Alex mailed him a letter offering him “Oceanhaven” for the May-June season that Alex did this act with a present contractual intent in mind.
Further, the facts stipulate that Alex identified the terms as “same terms as last year” which implies both parties are aware of the terms.
Lastly, given that Alex asked Bob to respond within a week, implies that he sent Bob an offer to lease Oceanhaven for the season.
Was there an indirect revocation of the offer on February 4th?
The knowledge by an offeree from a reliable source that offeror can not perform. It requires acts inconsistent with the contract.
The facts assert that Bob learned about Oceanhaven no longer being available on February 4th. Further, Bob heard this information from his real estate agent. Since his real estate agent is probably in the business of knowing what properties are available for season rentals, this appears to be a reliable source. Moreover, the news the real estate person shared was that Oceanhaven was rented to someone else for 6 months, effective March 1st. Accordinly, Oceanhaven would no longer be available from May through June. Because of this, the offeror can no longer perform. Lastly, since the person who is renting Oceanhave is not affiliated with Bob, it is reasonable to say that the acts are inconsistent with the terms of the offer.
Did Bob accept Alex’s offer on February 5th?
An acceptance is an unequivocal assent to the terms of the offer. A bilateral contract requires a return promise while a unilateral contract requires complete performance.
According to the facts, Bob wrote Alex on February 5th stating “I’ll take Oceanhaven per your leeter of February 1st. Being that Bob accepted Alex’s terms