In regards to the Mercer v. Lemmens (1964) case a purchaser of a property was given the preemptive rights to purchase an adjoining parcel for $10,000. The owner subsequently sold the lot for $22,000 without offering it to the holder of the preemptive right to purchase. I would like you to focus only on the following four issues: Was the description of the property sufficient ? Did the preemptive right to the property occur within a "reasonable" time ? Was the consideration for the preemptive right sufficient ? Was the amount of damages awarded to the plaintiff by the lower court proper ? For each of the four issues: Summarize the court's findings for each of the four questions (issues) presented. Do you agree with the court's findings on each of these four issues? Why or why not