Isabel owns a house, which she advertises for sale for $300,000. On April 1, Jon-Pierre offers Isabel $280,000 for the house. On April 5, Isabel has delivered to Jon-Pierre at his office a form that includes additional terms but does not state a price

Question

At 9 A.M. on April 6, Jon-Pierre signs the form and gives it to Karla, his administrative assistant, with instructions to mail it. At 10 A.M., Isabel calls to tell Jon-Pierre that the deal is off. The next day, Karlamails the signed form to Isabel. When Isabel refuses to sell the house to Jon-Pierre, he files a suit against her, alleging breach of contract. Isabel claims that there was no contract. What are arguments supporting each party's position? What is the court likely to rule? Explain.

Answer 1

Jon-Pierre might assert his intent to accept and point to his signature on Isabel's form as proof of the assertion. He might claim that he accepted Isabel's counteroffer (including the additional terms) before it was revoked. He might argue that he put his acceptance into the "stream of commerce," or the "route of response," or the "transmission of delivery," or some similar phrase, when he gave it to Karla, his administrative assistant.
Isabel might contend that there was no contract because she revoked the offer before the acceptance was received. Isabel might argue that Jon-Pierre did not place his acceptance into any "mode of dispatch" because Jon-Pierre could still control the form—he had only given it to his administrative assistant, who did not mail it until the next day, long after Isabel had revoked the offer.
The court would most likely agree with Isabel and hold that the acceptance was not effective. Jon-Pierre still controlled his acceptance at the time that Isabel revoked the offer. Jon-Pierre's acceptance was mailed too late.