On April 1, Mr. Guiseppi called Ms. Jafari, the president of Precious, offering to sell Lots 27 and 28 for $5.5 million. On April 2, Ms. Jafari called Mr. Guiseppi to accept the offer, and later that day, the parties entered into a written contract. The completion date for the transaction (i.e., the day when Precious would pay for the properties and Guiseppi would transfer the legal title to the properties) was May 15.

Imagine that Precious obtains appropriate financing and communicates to Guiseppi on April 12 the intention to proceed with the contract. Furthermore, the architectural design firm hired by Precious measured Lots 27 and 28 to be 108,100 square feet, as stated in the contract. On April 10, Mr. Guiseppi called Ms. Jafari with some bad news. His company had miscalculated how much they would be left with after the sale of Lots 27 and 28. Remember (from Assignment #1), the objective behind selling these lots was to help cover the skyrocketing costs it was facing in another development project. Mr. Guiseppi's financial advisors simply instructed him that he could not sell Lots 27 and 28 at such a low price ($5.5 million). Mr. Guiseppi tried to convince Ms. Jafari to amend the contract to a sale price of $6.5 million, but after she refused, Mr. Guiseppi told her that they would not be completing the sale to Precious on April 12. Ms. Jafari was furious and, shortly after April 12 came and went, she initiated a lawsuit against Guiseppi for breach of contract, asking the court for the remedy of specific performance. What types of arguments must Precious make in order to succeed in obtaining specific performance, and do you think they will ultimately succeed?