Fleming’s Legal Writing Workshop
Assignment # 3 Practice Essay
Contracts Hypothetical at page
FFOL Workbook
Submitted by: Michelle Fornaro as a WORD document to FLEX Program Support Coordinator via email in partial fulfillment of the writing
requirement for the FLEX program at Trinity Law School
Hypothetical # 6 Contract
Bob v Alex
Facts: Alex offers Bob his Oceanhaven beach house for same terms as last year on Feb 1, requests reply
by Feb 8. Bob learns on Feb 4 through his realtor that Alex leased Oceanhaven to Smith for 6 months
effective March 1. Bob then writes Alex on Feb. 5 “I’ll take Oceanhaven per you letter Feb1.
Issue: Indirect Revocation
Rule: Indirect Revocation: The knowledge by an offeree from a reliable source that offers can
not perform. It requires acts inconsistent with the contract
Analysis: Bob learned on Feb 4 through his realtor who is a reliable source, that Alex leased
Oceanhaven to Smith for 6 months effective March 1 which makes it impossible for Alex to
lease it to Bob from May through June. Alex’s actions are inconsistent with the contract he has
with Bob, thereby terminating his contract with Bob through Indirect Revocation on Feb 4. Bob
was aware that Oceanhaven was no longer available when he sent his acceptance on Feb 5, one
day after he learned of the Indirect Revocation and is not valid.
Conclusion: Contract formation consists of an offer, bargained for consideration and acceptance.
A contract can be revoked by the offeror up until the offeree dispatches acceptance. In this case
Bob has learned if the Revocation from a reliable source before he issued an acceptance. Bob
and Alex have no contract. Alex is not liable to Bob.
Bob v Tom
Facts: Tom offered Bob a lease on one of two properties Yellowhouse for $5000 or Greenhouse
for 2000 on Feb 2. Bob rejected Tom’s offer and made a counter offer on Feb 4. Tom rejected
Bob’s counter offer
Issue: Contract Formation..
Whether Bob and Tom
had a valid contract
Analysis: For a contract to be valid there must be an Offer, bargained for consideration
acceptance and mutual assent. In this case there was no acceptance so there was no mutual
assent. The requirements necessary to form a valid contract were not met.
Bob and Tom do not have a contract. Tom is not liable to Bob.