The contractual element Zehmer contended missing was contractual capacity. In the context of contract law, "the term, "capacity" denotes a person's ability to satisfy the elements required for someone to enter binding contracts." (Cornell Law 2022). Zehmer in court said he and Lucy were intoxicated while drawing up the agreement causing Zehmer to not be sincere or joking while discussing the agreement. This would cause the elements to not be satisfied making the contract voidable. Even though they had been drinking at the time and drew the contract up on a napkin Zehmer went as far as testifying that "when Zehhmer asked his wife to sign he whispered that it was a joke so Lucy wouldn't hear and that it was not intended that he should hear." (Nancy Kubasek 2022, p.348) The ruling for Lucy V. Zehmer was ruled in favor of the plaintiff. The court found that both parties were drinking but that they were aware enough to know their own actions, making the contract valid. Lucy was found to be correct in that their agreement was a serious binding business transaction and not just a joke on the part of Zehmer. If Zehmer was truly joking his intention did not line up with his actions leading Lucy into believing that the agreement was valid. The judge found in favor of the plaintiff because both parties did not lack the mental ability to discuss a contract, write up a contract, sign that contract, and on top of it all accept an initial "$5 deal to seal the bargain." (Nancy Kubasek 2022, p.348). I agree with the judge's ruling for the plaintiff Lucy because I believe both parties fully understood what they were doing during the entire process of discussing the purchase of Ferguson Farm. Lucy testified during the case that if there was any joke about that night it was for how much he was going to pay for the farm. Lucy and Zehmer had been discussing the sale of the farm for the past 8 years and the amount of $50,000 was a good offer displaying the extended amount of planning and research that had been done over the years. "The farm had been bought for $11,000 and was assessed for taxation at $6,300. The purchase price was $50,000. Zehmer admitted that it was a good price." (Nancy Kubasek 2022, p.348). I think If Zehmer was merely jesting about selling his farm he would never have signed the contract and taken the five dollars after as a sign of good faith, completing the contract. I agree with the decision and think they both got a fair deal despite having to hammer out the detail in court. A personal experience in which I entered a contract that I did not think of as a binding contact at the time was when I purchased service for my first cell phone. At the time my understanding was that if I stopped payments on my service, I would no longer be able