Isaac operated a second hand store and purchased an antique chair at a garage sale for $150.00. One week later Secord saw the chair in his store with a price tag of $1,000.00. She offered $500.00 but requested that Isaac keep the chair for 2 weeks since she was repainting her living room. Isaac told Secord that the chair was worth much more than $1,000.00 but he would sell it to her since she seemed to be a nice person. He proceeded to prepare an invoice which they both signed. Secord paid a deposit of $100.00 and agreed to pay the balance when she picked up the chair. Secord didn't pay particular attention to the invoice since she didn't believe that the terms of the deal were particularly complicated. Isaac gave her a copy of the invoice and put a "sold" sign on the chair. The following week, Lincoln, an antique dealer visited Isaac's store, carefully examined the chair and offered $10,000.00 for it. The chair, Lincoln explained, was a rare specimen dating to 1812. Isaac accepted Lincoln's offer. Isaac contacted Secord and told her that his mother had fallen in love with the chair and he wished to terminate their agreement. He offered to pay Secord $200.00 for her trouble. Secord told him she would like a day to think about it. She was suspicious that Isaac would offer her $200.00 when the chair was only worth $500.00. Secord reviewed her invoice and discovered that the price in the invoice was $1,000.00. After receiving several increasingly demanding calls from Isaac and feeling intensely pressured and not sure what to do, Secord confirmed that she would accept his offer of $200.00 to release him from their sale agreement. The next week Secord saw an article in the local newspaper featuring Lincoln and Isaac and the discovery of the rare 1812 chair worth $10,000.00. She immediately recognized the chair. Secord believes that she still has a binding agreement to buy the chair for $500.00, but is willing to pay the $1,000.00 amount in the invoice if necessary. She does not feel that the agreement to terminate her purchase agreement with Isaac is binding since he lied to her about his mother and she agreed only because she felt pressured and threatened by his belligerent phone calls. She commences an action against Isaac and requests: a declaration that the agreement to release Isaac is null and void; rectification of the invoice and specific performance of the agreement for the purchase and sale of the chair for $500.00, or alternatively specific performance of the purchase agreement for $1,000.00; (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (iv) an injunction to prohibit the sale of the chair to Lincoln; damages for breach of contract in the amount of $9,500.00; punitive damages of $20,000.00. Required: Examine Secord's case, Isaac's position in defending the lawsuit, the applicable principles and likely result of the litigation. (ii) While the lawsuit is pending, a fire breaks out in Isaac's store and the chair is destroyed. How does this affect the rights and obligations of the parties? Does the principle of frustration apply? (iii) Assume there is no fire. However, while the lawsuit is pending, Isaac has the chair appraised for insurance purposes. The appraiser confirms that the chair is not an authentic antique, but is a simple replica which is worth $100.00. Both Secord and Lincoln find out about the appraisal and both now refuse to purchase the chair. Isaac comes to you and asks that you advise him if he has any legal basis to commence an action against either Secord or Lincoln and, if so, what he will be entitled to claim.