Person M contracted to sell his car to person H for $ 18,500. It was agreed that M will deliver the vehicle on Wednesday and H will settle the payment on Friday. On Tuesday, H conveyed his decision of not buying the car from M. However, by Friday, H tendered the agreed sum to M. M turned down the contract and H filed a lawsuit for breach of the contract. M contended anticipatory repudiation freed him from the contractual liability. To find: Whose claim will be held true in the given case.

Question

James sold his 1965 e-type Jaguar car to Shirley for $18,500. During the negotiations James claimed that the car was actually a 1963 model, which were rarer, and therefore more valuable. Shirley, who was 17 at the time of purchase, bought the car on the understanding it was the 1963 model. Are all the elements of a valid contract present? Explain your answer.

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 14, Problem 2BS

Summary Introduction

Case summary: Person M contracted to sell his car to person H for $18,500. It was agreed that M will deliver the vehicle on Wednesday and H will settle the payment on Friday. On Tuesday, H conveyed his decision of not buying the car from M. However, by Friday, H tendered the agreed sum to M. M turned down the contract and H filed a lawsuit for breach of the contract. M contended anticipatory repudiation freed him from the contractual liability.

To find: Whose claim will be held true in the given case.

Expert Solution & Answer

Trending nowThis is a popular solution!

See solution

Check out sample textbook solution

Students have asked these similar questions

James sold his 1965 e-type Jaguar car to Shirley for $18,500. During the negotiations James claimed that the car was actually a 1963 model, which were rarer, and therefore more valuable. Shirley, who was 17 at the time of purchase, bought the car on the understanding it was the 1963 model. Are all the elements of a valid contract present? Explain your answer.

Al, the owner of Fitness Corp., a manufacturer of gym equipment, calls Bob, the owner of Bob's Gym. During the conversation, Al offers to sell Bob an assortment of 100 dumbells, of different weights and sizes, for $600.00. After the phone call, Al sends Bob an email confirming their conversation. Since Al and Bob never signed a contract, their agreement is unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. True False

Charles and Nicolette went to Italy in November 2008, where Charles proposed marriage and presented Nicolette with a diamond ring. She accepted the proposal and the ring. On the same day, Nicolette asked Charles where he had purchased the ring. She became disappointed when he told her where he bought it, and she gave him back the ring, suggesting a different style she would like. He returned the ring to the jeweler and received a refund of $5,000. He then purchased a new ring for $12,000. Charles testified that near the end of November he “reproposed” and presented the second ring to Nicolette. The relationship soon soured and in late February 2009 Charles asked for the return of the ring. Contrary to Charles’ testimony that he gave the second ring as an engagement ring in late November, Nicolette testified that he gave the second ring to her a few days before Christmas as a holiday gift. [Miller v. Chiaia, 2011 WL 1367050 (Conn. Superior)] 1. Provide a paragraph with more than five…