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.