Consideration Is One Mechanism By Which The Leg

considerationconsideration Is One Mechanism By Which The Legal Syste

Consideration is one mechanism by which the legal system determines what contracts the courts will enforce. Do you think the legal system should enforce more promises? Why or why not?

Johnny, a neighbor who is not a merchant under the Uniform Commercial Code, offers to buy a car from Mark for $30,000. Mark asks Johnny for some time to think about it. Johnny says sure. He writes on a piece of paper that he will keep the offer open for two weeks. A week later Johnny sees another car he would rather buy. He purchases that, and then he tells Mark that he is revoking his offer. Two days after that Mark said: “I’m sorry Johnny you made an offer in writing to buy my car. I’m going to hold you to that.” Johnny replied: “Sorry I cannot do that. But I will promise to pay you $10,000 for the help you gave me last year around the house.” Somewhat mollified Mark accepts. A week later and Johnny decided to renege on that promise as well. Fed up, Mark sued Johnny for breach of contract on both the promise to buy the car and the promise for the $10,000. Discuss whether the elements of a contract are satisfied in this case, considering consideration, offer, acceptance, and intention to create legal relations. Use the textbook and outside resources to provide accurate and substantive answers. Illustrate with examples where appropriate. Write a short essay (400–500 words), using APA format.

Paper For Above instruction

The case involving Johnny and Mark presents a complex scenario that highlights critical elements of contract law, particularly consideration, offer, acceptance, and the intention to create legal relations. Analyzing whether these elements are satisfied in Johnny's actions will demonstrate the application of legal principles and whether contractual enforcement is justified in these circumstances.

Firstly, consideration, a core element of contracts, refers to something of value exchanged between the parties. For a promise to be enforceable, it must be supported by consideration; that is, each party must incur some detriment or confer a benefit. In the case of Johnny's offer to purchase the car, his promise to pay $30,000 in exchange for the car constitutes consideration, assuming Mark's reliance on this promise was reasonable. However, Johnny's revocation of the offer before acceptance complicates matters. Under the common law, an offer may be revoked at any time before acceptance unless there is a firm offer supported by consideration or an option contract, which Johnny's promise of keeping the offer open for two weeks may constitute if supported by consideration.

In this scenario, Johnny's promise to keep the offer open for two weeks may not be enforceable unless he provided consideration for that promise, such as paying a fee or performing some act. Simply stating the offer would remain open is generally considered a gratuitous promise and can be revoked at will. Since Johnny purchased another car and revoked his offer before Mark accepted, the element of mutual assent was not satisfied for the car sale. Mark's attempt to enforce the original offer reflects a misunderstanding of contractual revocation and consideration issues, as there was no binding agreement at that point.

Regarding the second promise, Johnny offers to pay Mark $10,000 as a gift for past help. This promise is not supported by consideration because a promise to give a gift without something in return is generally unenforceable under contract law. However, Mark accepts this promise, and Johnny later renege on it, which constitutes a breach. In this context, the doctrine of promissory estoppel could potentially protect Mark if he relied on Johnny’s promise to his detriment, but this depends on whether such reliance was reasonable and foreseeable.

Additionally, the intention to create legal relations is crucial. Social or domestic agreements are typically presumed not to intend legal enforceability, but commercial promises like Johnny's offer and Mark's acceptance are presumed to be legally binding. Since Johnny initially offered to buy the car and Mark accepted through conduct, there was an intention to create legal relations for the car transaction. The promise for the $10,000, however, may lack such intention given it was a gift-like promise.

In conclusion, the elements of a valid contract—from offer and acceptance to consideration and intent—are not fully satisfied in Johnny's case. The car sale was not finalized due to revocation before acceptance and lack of consideration for the open offer. The second promise was unsupported by consideration and was revoked, and thus, unenforceable. Mark’s lawsuit underscores the importance of understanding these legal principles to determine contractual validity. Enforcing promises without consideration can lead to unjust outcomes, which is why the law emphasizes these elements to maintain contract integrity and fairness.

References

• Beatty, J. F., Samuelson, S. S., & Samuelson, L. M. (2020). Business Law and the Legal Environment (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.
• Farnsworth, E. A. (2019). Contracts (4th ed.). Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
• Poole, J. (2017). Textbook on Contract Law (13th ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Schwartz, A. (2019). Contract Law: Examples and Explanations (7th ed.). Aspen Publishers.
• Treitel, G. H. (2015). The Law of Contract (14th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell.
• Perillo, J. M. (2018). Corbin on Contracts (rev. ed.). West Academic Publishing.
• McKendrick, E. (2019). Contract Law (9th ed.). Palgrave.
• Clarke, R. (2016). The Law of Contract (7th ed.). Routledge.
• Newman, S. (2020). Contract Law: Theory and Practice. Routledge.
• Schlegel, J. H. (2017). Understanding Contract Law. Wolters Kluwer.