Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 WhatsApp Us Now
Otto, an antique car dealer, is shown a 1968 Ford Shelby Cobra Mustang automobile by Devin, who just had inherited the car from his uncle. Impressed by how pristine the automobile was, Otto orally proposes that Devin give him an exclusive contract to sell the automobile. As part of the proposal, Otto represented he could get between $100,000 to $125,000 for the automobile and requested a fee of 20% of gross sales price and states that he will conduct all advertising in order promote the 1968 Ford Shelby Mustang and to be given 16 months to find a buyer. Devin agrees but because he felt 20% of the gross sale price was high, he requested Otto to receive only
10% of the gross sales price. Otto agreed and stated that he will send Devin a written contract setting forth these terms “to verify our agreement.” Devin receives the written contract, which recites the terms of the oral understanding, but fails to sign it.
Devin having second thoughts since he feels he should receive all of the proceeds from the automobile since he was the one that inherited the car advertises the 1968 Ford Shelby Mustang automobile. Brent reads the advertisement and calls Devin and offered him $90,000 for the car. Devin tells Brent he will not take less than $100,000. Brent tells Devin he will have to think about it and call him back. In the meantime, Devin decides that he should keep the car in the family since it is a rare classic. Devin writes a note to Otto that states he has decided not to sell the automobile. Further, when Brent calls Devin back about the automobile, he states he has decided not to sell the car.
1. Otto sues Devin for breach of contract. Discuss
2. Brent sues Devin for breach of contract. Discuss +400 words, citation format is APA
1. Otto v. Devin: Breach of Contract
In a breach of contract action, Otto’s burden would be to prove that the parties reached an agreement with certain terms and conditions, and that Devin breached those terms and conditions by refusing to sell the car without cause. Generally, for an oral agreement to be valid it must contain all essential elements such as offer, acceptance, consideration and mutual assent (Reed & Radford). The evidence necessary to support a breach of contract claim includes the testimony of witnesses or documents that demonstrate the existence of a valid contract (Cheeseman). In this case Otto can show consideration in his proposal which includes paying Devin a fee of 20% of gross sales price in exchange for giving him exclusive rights to sale automobile plus he will be conducting advertising campaigns in order promote 1968 Ford Shelby Cobra Mustang. Further, Otto’s written offer sets forth all essential element required for an enforceable contract including offer, acceptance and consideration; hence if accepted by Devin it creates legally binding obligation between them
However since there is no signed document from Devin indicating he has accepted Otto’s written offer; hence there are no legally binding agreements exist between them at this time. Therefore if Devin decided not to sell his automobile because he wanted to keep it in family then he have not breached any contractual obligations towards Otto
2. Brent v. Devin: Breach Of Contract
Brent does not have standing under contract law due his lack privity relationship with both parties (Cheeseman). There was never any direct agreement between Brent and Devin where Brent agreed/offered $90K for the car therefore nothing could be enforced against him under common law principles so there is no contractual obligation on part of Brent which can be enforces against him by either party involved i-e neither by Devine nor by Otta. It is important hereunder mention when two persons enter into a promise that require one party performance what ever benefit arise out are subject only within them unless third party beneficiary emerges who hold right ful legal standing along with other two but here we do not see any thing similar happening over here as well so both Otta’s nd Devine’s claims against Brent fails in court .