1 6-1 Case Analysis: Lucy v. Zehmer Melissa Edwards Business Department, Southern New Hampshire University BUS 206: Business Law Andrew Halverson October 8, 2023
CASE ANALYSIS 2 6-1 Case Analysis: Lucy v. Zehmer In the case of Lucy vs Zehmer, Zehmer contended that the contractual elements of intent and capacity were missing. He stated that the entire interaction had been made in jest and that he did not have any intention of selling his property to Lucy. Zehmer also said that he did not have the capacity to sign the agreement because he had been drinking during the events. In the first ruling by the trial court, they found for the defendants the Zehmers but then the plaintiffs Lucy and his brother appealed to the Supreme Court, and they ruled in favor of the Lucys. The Supreme Court contended that evidence shows that Lucy did not know that it was intended to be a joke, that he viewed the interaction as a serious business transaction made in good faith, and that the contract was binding for both Zehmer to sell Ferguson Farm and him to purchase it for fifty thousand dollars. (Dynamic Business Law 5e, 2019) Justice Buchanan stated "We must look to the outward expression of a person as manifesting his intention rather than to his secret and unexpressed intention. 'The imputes to a person an intention corresponding to the reasonable meaning of his words and acts'" (Dynamic Business Law 5e, 2019). Lucy believed by Zehmer signing the contract, he agreed to the terms they had discussed. Lucy did not hear the whispering made by the Zehmers or believe their actions of the evening were not done in good faith. As for their drinking, it was determined it was not enough for them to not fully understand what they were doing. In this case, although unfortunate for the Zehmers, I agree with the Supreme Court ruling. The Zehmers knew that Lucy wanted to buy their farm and had been trying to for years. Lucy covered the three elements of a valid offer; by writing up a contract he covered the offeror's intent to be bound, he offered fifty thousand dollars to buy the farm initiating definite and certain terms, and by his actions on that night, the communication to an offeree was present. By the
CASE ANALYSIS 3 Zehmers signing the contract, the acceptance was valid because the manifestation of intent to be bound to the terms of the offer was communicated to the offeror by the offeree. (Dynamic Business Law 5e, 2019) Everything else aside, if the Zehmers were not serious about selling, they should not have signed the contract Lucy had drawn up and ended their conversation then and let him know they had just been joking around with him and were not serious. They let everything go too far, and by those actions lost their farm. A time I had entered a verbal contract without even realizing it recently happened. I created a potted succulent arrangement