BUS206 William Donovan 6-1 Case Analysis: Lucy v. Zehmer
The Lucy v. Zehmer case has a lot to digest , two friends are out drinking when during a conversa on, a contract is formed between both par es for purchasing the Ferguson Farm from the Zehmer(s). Lucy has been adamant for at least eight years about wan ng to buy the farm from Zehmer. Once Zehmer was
was not valid and was not serious about selling the property. Zehmer argument was the intent; a contractual element was missing or lacked thereof. His argument was his inten on was only to be a joke, and he was never serious about selling the farm to his friend Lucy. Upon hearing both par es regarding the contract sale of Zehmer's Ferguson Farm, the courts ruled in favor of the plain (s), Lucy. Based on the evidence, Lucy believed the contract was valid, although Zehmer intended it to be a joke. He led Lucy to believe he intended to sell the farm due to the nego a on of terms they discussed concerning the farm throughout the evening of drinking and talking. The signing and acknowledgment of the contract, including the agreed-upon compensa on of $50,000 for the sale of the property. The courts agreed that Zehmer not protes ng the conversa on as just a joke would result in Lucy believing the contract was valid and enforceable; the courts agreed and granted judgment to the plain (s). I agree with the court's ruling in favor of the plain (s). Based on the evidence, Lucy understood and intended to purchase the Ferguson Farm from the Zehmers. However, alcohol had been consumed throughout the evening. The e ects of alcohol didn't cloud the judgment of both par es, which would have made the contract invalid. The evidence stated a good faith o er in which both par es nego ated and agreed upon the terms. The good faith acceptance in which both par es look over the terms and condi ons of the contract. The evidence alone is enough evidence to rule in favor of the plain (s). I once entered a contract with a family member regarding becoming roommates.There were speci rules in the contract which I did not think were enforceable, such as no guest allowed a er 10 pm, I needed to be in the house no later than midnight if I was not going to come home for the evening, I needed to inform my roommate with at least 2 hours in advanced no ce. When the contract was wri en, I believed my family member's inten ons of the rules were a joke that had been told several mes before becoming roommates. While there were speci c rules I knew she was serious about, such as the late rent policy, being responsible for our guest and their behaviors inside and outside of the apartment, and the no pet policy. However, I did not think she was serious about the othe