Question

2. Feaheny offered to sell Quinn her house. She made an offer to sell on an installment payment basis but also asked Quinn to make a cash offer. Quinn made a cash offer which Feaheny rejected. Quinn then accepted the installment payment basis. Feaheny refused to perform the con- tract, and Quinn sued her. Was she liable for breach of contract?

3. The Great A. & P. Tea Co. rented a store from Geary. On February 25 the company wrote Geary offering to execute a lease for an additional year, commencing on May 1. At 10:30 a.m. on March 7, Geary wrote a letter containing a lease for the additional year and accepting the offer. On the same day at 1:30 p.m. the company mailed Geary a letter stating that it withdrew the offer to execute the new lease. Each party received the other's letter the following day. Was there an effective acceptance of the offer to make a lease?

4. A sent B a letter stating "You have a 30-day option in which to purchase my car for $2,000." Twenty-five days later, B tendered $2,000 to A and informed him that he exercised the option. A claimed that he could not exercise the option because the option was not binding as A had not received anything for it. Was A correct?

5. The owner of a business made an offer to sell an interest in the business for a specified price. The buyer wrote back agreeing to the terms of the offer and stating that payment would be made in 30 days after the transaction was completed. Was the owner bound by a contract with the buyer?

6. A signed a contract agreeing to sell land he owned but reserved the right to take the hay from the land until the following October. He gave the contract form to B, a broker. C, a prospective buyer, agreed to buy the land and signed the contract but crossed out the provision regarding the hay crop. Was there a binding contract between A and C?

Answer 1

Quinn Vs Feaheny

The contracting parties involved in this case is Quinn and Feaheny, Here Feaheny was not liable for the Breach of the Contract, As she had not performed any Contract.

explanation as follows,

It is common Learning that a simple offer to contract is terminated by a rejection on the part of the offeree. There is a rejection when the offeree indicates to the offeror that he will not accept or that he no longer is considering the offer.

By a not altogether obvious extension of this rule, A counteroffer ( i.e., a counter proposal of some sort or a purported acceptance which however adds new terms or imposes conditions not implicit in the original offer) is considered to be a rejection of the original offer and so a termination of the offeree’s power to accept it, unless the offeree in his counter offer makes it clear that he is still considering or willling to consider the original offer.

Note:- the above given all different questions, as per guideline i’m Answering the 1st question in the order. Thank you.