Business Law Questions Need them Asap.

Please read directions.

Need each case seperately

Case 10.2: Agreement on page 194 For each question you should provide at least one reference in APA format (in-text citations and references as described in detail in the Syllabus). Each answer should be double-spaced in 12point font, and your response to each question should be between 300 and 1,000 words 10.2 Agreement Wilbert Heikkila listed eight parcels of real property for sale. David McLaughlin submitted written offers to purchase three of the parcels. Three printed purchase agreements were prepared and submitted to Heikkila, with three earnest-money checks from McLaughlin. Writing on the purchase agreements, Heikkila changed the price of one parcel from $145,000 to $150,000, the price of another parcel from $32,000 to $45,000, and the price of the third parcel from $175,000 to $179,000. Heikkila also changed the closing dates on all three of the properties, added a reservation of mineral rights to all three, and signed the purchase agreements. McLaughlin did not sign the purchase agreements to accept the changes before Heikkila withdrew his offer to sell. McLaughlin sued to compel specific performance of the purchase agreements under the terms of the agreements before Heikkila withdrew his offer. The court granted Heikkila's motion to dismiss McLaughlin's claim. McLaughlin appealed. Does a contract to convey real property exist between Heikkila and McLaughlin? McLaughlin v. Heikkila, 697 N.W.2d 231, Web 2005 Minn. App. Lexis 591 (Court of Appeals of Minnesota) JUST EXTRA NOTES CONCEPT SUMMARY: TERMINATION OF AN OFFER BY OPERATION OF LAW Action Description Destruction of the subject matter The subject matter of an offer is destroyed prior to acceptance through no fault of either party. Death or incompetency Prior to acceptance of an offer, either the offeror or the offeree dies or becomes incompetent. Supervening illegality Prior to the acceptance of an offer, the object of the offer is made illegal by statute, regulation, court decision, or other law. Lapse of time An offer terminates upon the expiration of a stated time in the offer. If no time is stated, the offer terminates after a \"reasonable time.\" Who Can Accept an Offer? Only the offeree has the legal power to accept an offer and create a contract. Third persons usually do not have the power to accept an offer. If an offer is made individually to two or more persons, each has the power to accept the offer. Once one of the offerees accepts the offer, it terminates as to the other offeree(s). An offer that is made to two or more persons jointly must be accepted jointly. Unequivocal Acceptance An offeree's acceptance must be an unequivocal acceptance. That is, the acceptance must be clear and unambiguous, and it must have only one possible meaning. An unequivocal acceptance must not contain conditions or exceptions. Example Abraham says to Caitlin, \"I will sell you my iPhone for $300.\" Caitlin says, \"Yes, I will buy your iPhone at that price.\" This is an unequivocal acceptance that creates a contract. Usually, even a \"grumbling acceptance\" is a legal acceptance. Example Jordan offers to sell his computer to Taryn for $450. Taryn says, \"Okay, I'll take the computer, but I sure wish you would make me a better deal.\" This grumbling acceptance creates an enforceable contract because it was not a rejection or a counteroffer. An equivocal response by the offeree does not create a contract. Example Halim offers to sell his iMac computer to Nicole for $400. Nicole says, \"I think I would like it, but I'm not sure.\" This is equivocation and does not amount to an acceptance. Mirror Image Rule For an acceptance to exist, the offeree must accept the terms as stated in the offer. This is called the mirror image rule. To meet this rule, the offeree must accept the terms of the offer without modification. Any attempt to accept the offer on different terms constitutes a counteroffer, which rejects the offeror's offer. mirror image rule A rule which states that for an acceptance to exist, the offeree must accept the terms as stated in the offer. Silence as Acceptance Silence usually is not considered acceptance, even if the offeror states that it is. This rule is intended to protect offerees from being legally bound to offers because they failed to respond. Example Coco sends a letter to Dwayne stating, \"You have agreed to purchase my motorcycle for $4,000 unless I otherwise hear from you by Friday.\" Obviously, there is no contract if Dwayne ignores the letter. Time of Acceptance Under the common law of contracts, acceptance of a bilateral contract occurs when the offeree dispatches the acceptance by an authorized means of communication. This rule is called the acceptance-upon-dispatch rule or, more commonly, the mailbox rule. Under this rule, the acceptance is effective when it is dispatched, even if it is lost in transmission. If an offeree first dispatches a rejection and then sends an acceptance, the mailbox rule does not apply to the acceptance.4 Mode of Acceptance An acceptance must be properly dispatched. The acceptance must be properly addressed, packaged in an appropriate envelope or container, and have prepaid postage or delivery charges. Under common law, if an acceptance is not properly dispatched, it is not effective until it is actually received by the offeror. proper dispatch Case 9.2: Bilateral or Unilateral Contract on page 179 For each question you should provide at least one reference in APA format (in-text citations and references as described in detail in the Syllabus). Each answer should be double-spaced in 12point font, and your response to each question should be between 300 and 1,000 words in length. 9.2 Bilateral or Unilateral Contract G. S. Adams, Jr., vice president of the Washington Bank & Trust Co., met with Bruce Bickham. An agreement was reached whereby Bickham agreed to do his personal and corporate banking business with the bank, and the bank agreed to loan Bickham money at 7.5 percent interest per annum. Bickham would have ten years to repay the loans. For the next two years, the bank made several loans to Bickham at 7.5 percent interest. Adams then resigned from the bank. The bank notified Bickham that general economic changes made it necessary to charge a higher rate of interest on both outstanding and new loans. Bickham sued the bank for breach of contract. Was the contract a bilateral or a unilateral contract? Does Bickham win? Bickham v. Washington Bank & Trust Company, 515 So.2d 457, Web 1987 La.App. Lexis 10442 (Court of Appeal of Louisiana)