John, a homeowner, answers the telephone and listens to a solicitor make a five-minute sales pitch for Weed Gardening Services. John responds, “No, thank you,” and hangs up. Two days later, John returns home from work to find a crew gardening in his yard and a bill for $200 sitting on the porch. When John tells the Weed representative that he never asked for this service, Weed responds by saying, “It looks much better, doesn’t it? You got the service, now pay for it. ” John agrees that the work was of good quality, but refuses to pay for it. He is later served with a summons to appear in magistrate court because of this dispute.
How should the judge rule? A. For Weed Gardening Services, because Weed performed good quality services for John. B. For John, because he did not accept Weed’s offer. Yes, the correct answer is B. John never accepted Weed’s offer. Without acceptance, no contract was formed. John does not have to pay for the yard work, regardless of quality. EXERCISE 2: This exercise is about offer and acceptance. Harry drops by Mack’s house and finds him working on his old pickup truck in the driveway. Mack kicks the truck and exclaims to Harry, “This piece of junk isn’t worth a tank of gas – you can have it.
” Harry says thanks and the next day comes by with his SUV to tow away the pickup. Mack stops him and says the truck is working now. Harry goes to court and claims that the truck Mack promised him was worth $500 and Mack should pay him that amount. How should the judge rule? A. For Mack, because there was no consideration for the transaction. Yes, the correct answer is A. Mack offered the truck to Harry, and Harry indicated his acceptance by saying thanks and attempting to tow the truck away. But Harry did not provide any consideration in return for the truck. Without consideration, no contract was created. B.
For Harry, because Mack promised him the pickup truck, and that created a contract. C. For Mack, because Harry never accepted his offer. EXERCISE 3: This exercise is about offer and acceptance. Mike puts an ad in the newspaper stating that he wants to sell his truck for $500. James goes to Mike’s home and tells him that he is interested in buying the truck. After looking at it, James hands Mike $500 in cash, which Mike puts in his pocket. Just then, Steve drives up and tells Mike that he’ll give him $600 for the truck. Mike hands James back his $500 and sells the truck to Steve. James sues Mike for breach of contract.
How should the judge rule? A. For Mike, because there was no offer and acceptance. B. For Mike, because he gave the money back to James. C. For James, because once Mike accepted the money, the deal was closed. C is correct. MIke’s ad offered to sell the truck for $500 and James accepted the offer by handing Mike the money, which he pocketed. At that time, both Mike and James intended that James would buy the truck. These actions and mutual intention created a contract between Mike and James, which Mike breached by selling his truck to Steve. D. For Mike, because he didn’t specifically say why he was taking the money.