Question

Bo was the owner of Lot No. 1 on which he had built his home. Sadia owned the adjoiningLots No. 2 and 3, which were undeveloped, along with Lot No. 4 on which Sadia’shome was located. Bo wished to acquire Lot No. 2 in order to protect his home sitefrom crowding if Lot No. 2 should be sold to a stranger.Meeting Sadia on the street on January 2, Bo explained his wish to acquire LotNo. 2 and offered to buy it from Sadia for $75,000 cash. Sadia agreed and promised todeliver a deed to Lot No. 2 in 4 weeks. Bo paid Sadia $1,000 as a deposit or downpayment towards the purchase price of $75.000.On February 1, Sadia told Bo that she had changed her mind. Bo demands thatSadia perform the contract. Sadia contends that if there is any contract, it is unenforceable.

(a) Was there an offer and acceptance sufficient to constitute a contract between Sadiaand Bo? Explain.

b) In an action by Bo against Sadia for breach of contract, judgment for whom? Explain.

(c) Assume that on January 10, Bo sent to Sadia his check for $1,000 bearing thenotation “On account of purchase price of Lot No. 2” and that Sadia cashed the check,but later refused to convey Lot No. 2. Would Bo’s payment constitute sufficient part performanceto enable Bo to enforce the contract against Sadia? Explain.

(d) If the contract is not enforceable, may Bo recover his $1,000? Explain.

(e) Assume that in addition to the payment, Bo, with Sadia’s knowledge and consent,entered on Lot No. 2 and had it cleared of brush on January 20 at a cost of $150,but Sadia still refused to convey. Would Bo be entitled to obtain a decree of specific performanceto compel Sadia to deliver a deed to Lot. No. 2 to Bo upon paying to Sadia thebalance of $74,000? Explain.

(f) Would Bo be entitled to recover his $1,000 payment plus the $150 cost of clearingthe land? Explain.

(g) Assume that on March 1. Bo instituted a suit for specific performance and thatSadia denied she had agreed to sell. At the trial, the court decided that Bo was tellingthe truth and ordered Sadia to execute and deliver to Bo a deed to Lot. No. 2 upon Bopaying the balance of $74,000. Is Sadia entitled to have the decision reversed on appeal,if on the appeal Sadia raises for the first time the defense that her agreement wasnot in a writing signed by the party to be charged? Explain.

Answer 1

a. Was there an offer and acceptance sufficient to constitute a contract between Sadiaand Bo? Explain.

In this case Bo (the buyer) made an offer or his willingness to buy a certain asset from Sadia(the seller) who also accepted or reciprocated to sell her asset to Bo. There have been a mutual promise of selling and buying a certain asset for a defined amount giving arise to a bilateral contact.Also Bo has paid $1,000 to Sadia as a part performane of the contract which Sadia willfully accepted, which enforced the oral contract. However, in lack of written evidence the liability to prove is upon Bo.

b. In an action by Bo against Sadia for breach of contract, judgment for whom? Explain.

In an action by Bo against Sadia for breach of contract, there will be a judgement against Sadia.However, the liability to prove this an contract is upon Bo as there is no written evidence .

c.Assume that on January 10, Bo sent to Sadia his check for $1,000 bearing thenotation “On account of purchase price of Lot No. 2” and that Sadia cashed the check,but later refused to convey Lot No. 2. Would Bo’s payment constitute sufficient part performanceto enable Bo to enforce the contract against Sadia? Explain.

A part performane legally enforces an oral contract, despite the lack of written evidence. In this case Bo's Bank payment is sufficient to legally enforce the contract .

d. If the contract is not enforceable, may Bo recover his $1,000? Explain.

If the contract is not enforceable is a void contract,If Sadia accepts the payments and then gives it back to Bo then his money is recovered. Bo cannot file any suit against Sadia for the recovery of money.

As per the answering policies first 4 questions are answered.