Issue
Whether a contract was formed when Cameron and Abel discussed Cameron’s mowing of Abel’s lawn.Rule
R2d § 1: “A contract is a promise or a set of promises for the breach of which the law gives a remedy, or the performance of which the law in some way recognizes as a duty.”Analysis
All parties What about infants? Persons under guardianship? are capable of forming contracts. To determine if there was a contract, there needs to be an offer, acceptance (while they had the power of acceptance), and consideration. Good umbrella structure that sets up for sub-IRACs.
Offer IRAC
Whether there was an offer for Cameron to mow Abel’s lawn when Cameron quoted his price for the job. Good issue statement with regard to a singular incident, but note there are several incidents which could have been offers, not just one manifestation. ”An offer is a manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it.” R2d § 24 R2d § 26 and R2d § 33 are also relevant to this analysis. Cameron offered to mow Abel’s lawn. While at his house, he discussed the items needed (topsoil and seed), and the price of his performance. This was an offer as defined by R2d § 24 Why? Notice that neither the rule nor the analysis actually states that offers require price, subject matter, quantity, and parties. Cameron made an offer to mow Abel’s lawn. The analysis lacked arguments on both sides, and so there was not room for the conclusion to balance those arguments. But a better conclusion would balance the two parties’ arguments and resolve them via a “because” or “since” clause.Acceptance IRAC
Whether Abel accepted Cameron’s offer when he said “ok, but can you guarantee that I will have a nice lawn if I hire you to do all that?” Good. R2d § 58: “An acceptance must comply with the requirements of the offer as to the promise to be made or the performance to be rendered.” What about R2d § 59 and § 61? Are they relevant here? How about R2d § 39?Analysis: Abel’s saying OK and asking if he could guarantee the lawn be nice is an acceptance. The prior sentence is a conclusion and not analysis or parties’ arguments. While this is close to being a purported acceptance, which would terminate the offer, it is not. Why? It would be a purported acceptance if it was conditional on the guarantee that the lawn be nice (R2d § 59). In addition, the offer from Cameron was valid at the time that Abel accepted it. It happened during the same conversation, and while Abel still had the power of acceptance.
Abel accepted the offer and he asked a clarifying question. Similar to above: the conclusion does no new “work” because the analysis was actually a conclusion.Consideration IRAC
Was there consideration? Where? R2d § 71 (1-3): “(1) To constitute consideration, a performance or a return promise must be bargained for. (2) A performance or return promise is bargained for if it is sought by the promisor in exchange for his promise and is given by the promisee in exchange for that promise.” OK.Analysis: Using the bargained for/sought for analysis, there was consideration. Again, this is a conclusion, not analysis. The two parties agreed to exchange goods (bargain). Each party sought for the exchange; Abel wanted his lawn to look nice, and Cameron wanted to be paid to fix his lawn. Good analysis. They bargained for and sought for an exchange. In exchange for Abel’s money, Cameron would offer performance by fixing Abel’s lawn.
This meets the requirements of consideration; there was consideration. Again, the conclusion does no new work because the analysis offered the conclusion.