LEGL 3000 Business LawWoodbury School of BusinessUtah Valley UniversityCASE STUDY PROJECTThe…

LEGL 3000 Business LawWoodbury School of BusinessUtah Valley UniversityCASE STUDY PROJECTThe attached packet includes a contract fact scenario, and you have been provided a separate filewith a copy of a written contract and addenda related to the fact pattern.Using the case study description and materials (REPC, etc.) provided, provide detailed responses tothe questions below.You must work alone, but may use your books. The work product of any students who work in groups willbe considered plagiarism.Answers should be submitted in essay form and should be uploaded to Canvas in MS Word or .pdfformat by the due date and time in your Syllabus. Please direct any questions to your professor.Please note that there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and other problems in the case descriptionand other materials. This is intentional. Nearly all real cases have internal inconsistencies and otherfactual problems. Your job is to decide whether those problems are material to the legal questionsraised and, if so, how they impact your decision-making. You may decide that if the facts areresolved one way over another, then the legal conclusions may be different. In your answers, youwill want to explore and detail out these alternative possibilities.In presenting your answers, you should be as thorough and detailed as possible, showing yourwork, as it were, in how you arrived at your conclusions.Case Study Questions:1. Is there a contract between any of the parties? If there is a contract(s), describe and detailhow you arrived at that conclusion, and identify the parties to that contract and thecontracts terms.2. There were several purportedly contractual negotiations or transitions in the casedescription. If you decided that some of those transactions do not qualify as a contract,detail and describe why.3. Identify any defenses to enforcement that any of the parties may have and against whomthey would be asserted, and whether those defenses would be successful and why.4. Identify the available remedies that any party could request of a court, and whether a court isable or likely to provide that remedy and why.5. Describe how the concept of agency effected the parties legal positions in the case study.Did the agents help or harm their clients? Why?6. If you were the judge on this case and all the parties named in the case description wereparty to the lawsuit, how would you resolve the case and why? Who would end up with theproperty and on what terms? Who would get nothing and why?Case Study Scenario:Jon D’Man grew up in a small town in eastern Oregon. Jon played sports and was goodenough to earn a scholarship in baseball to his favorite university in Utah. Marsha Mello grew up inNew York City, as a Manhattenite. Although growing up in New York had its advantages, shelonged to see the wide open spaces of the western United States, and she applied to the sameuniversity in Utah that Jon was attending. Marsha was a big fan of baseball and loved attendinggames to support her school. She fell in love with the star player, Jon.One fateful game Jon was sliding into third and caught a spike and tore the ligaments in hisknee and ankle. This accident ended his professional dreams at the young age of 17. Jon and Marshadecided they would get married in four (4) years when they graduated. Jon had a settlement from hisinjury and a good-paying, part-time job. Marsha had a large inheritance from her grandmother, to beused only for educational related expenses. They decided to buy a home together even though Jonwas only 17 and Marsha was 21. But they wondered what they needed to do to buy a home.Jon and Marsha were both accounting students and were taking a wonderful Business Lawclass together from a wonderful professor-the same one you now have. They had a limitedknowledge of contracts, but they knew they should employ a Real Estate Agent to facilitate theirpurchase. They called a local hot-shot realtor to help them find the perfect property to start their lifetogether. After much searching, they found a 3 bedroom 2 bath home on a nice cul-de-s8c in aquiet, newer neighborhood on the outskirts of town.They sat down with their Agent to fill out their offer to purchase on a Utah Real EstatePurchase Contract (REPC). They discussed the home and its amenities. They loved the fact that thehome had an outdoor, portable hot tub under the stars. It could be easily moved under cover intothe carport in bad weather. They also loved the appliances that were in the kitchen. Theyparticularly loved the 6-burner, Maytag gas range. They decided to ask for them to be included inthe purchase price. The home was listed on the Multiple Listing Service (MLS) for which seemed tobe a little high for the neighborhood. Jon and Marsha decided to offer $207,000 with the sellerpaying 3% towards closing costs and for title insurance and for property taxes and for neededrepairs.Jon signed the REPC on the line for the Buyer (see Page. 6). In paragraph 25 of the REPC,Jon put the time for acceptance as 12 PM, 25 February 2011.The REPC said on P.l that the BUYER had included a post-dated check for $5,000. Thebroker marked the box delivered even though Marsha did not have her check book with her. Shepromised the agent that she would bring it to him ASAP.Buyers Broker delivered the REPC to Seller’s Broker, through a sales agent on the day afterthe REPC was completed by Jon and Marsha.Jon and Marsha had specifically marked the applicable boxes on page #1, Paragraph 1.2 forthe washer; the dryer; the frig; the water softener; and the security system. They also marked therequired boxes throughout the REPC.NOTE #1 TO STUDENTSYou will want to read the REPC and the two addenda and ask questions as the differentsections of the REPC are covered in the related chapters of the text book.Seller received the offer on the 21 February 2011.Seller marked, I accept with the following conditions. Buyers’ will have one (2) day to acceptterms contained in Addendum #1.See ADDENDUM #1:Seller returned REPC with Addendum #1 to Buyer’s Broker.Jon marked, I accept on Addendum #1 with the following conditions.See ADDENDUM #2Jon had his acceptance notarized the next day and gave it to his Broker, who gave it to theSeller’s Broker. Seller’s Broker got busy and distracted, and he forgot to give it to the Seller until 10AM. Broker reminded Seller that she only had until 12 AM to respond. Seller said thatwas ok, because she would put it in the mail by 11 PM, and that would be the time of acceptance.(She knew the mailbox rule) She mailed the acceptance at 10:15 PM. She immediately had seller’sremorse and changed her mind. She called the Buyer at 12:30 AM and said on her answeringmachine, I reject your offer. The deal is off. I will not sell my home at any price. The BUYERShad not yet received SELLER’S acceptance. (What about the inconsistent dispatch rule. Does itapply here?)Right after Buyers had mailed their last offer to Seller, but before seller had mailed anacceptance (see addendum #2), UB Flash announced it was building just down the road fromSeller’s house. Because of this announcement, the value of the Seller’s house jumped $100 K.Marsha heard about UB Flash’s plans and quickly called Seiler’s Broker on the phone and told himthat she would like to accepted seller’s offer on seller’s terms (see Addendum #1). She told Seller’sBroker she could close by 15 April 2011. Seller’s Broker was way excited to make a sale. Andwithout contacting seller, Seller’s Broker told Buyer, I accept your offer. You have just boughtyourselves a house. Marsha said, Fantastic. Ive got all the money for the house in a trust.That same day, Buyer #2 who is an undisclosed agent for UB Flash, offers the Seiler overthe phone $300K cash with no conditions, as is, close in 10 days. Buyer #2 promises a $20,000 nonrefundable earnest money with the oral offer. Seller does not know of her Agents actions withMarsha; therefore, she, the Seller, promises to sign the REPC as soon as buyer #2 mails it to her.She tells buyer #2, I accept with no reservations or conditions.Jon learns of seller’s intent to sell to Buyer #2 and sues to enforce his rights under his REPC.