Pete continued to look for a suitable space for his restaurant. He ran into one of his former professors, Jack Straw, who happened to own a great commercial property that would be ideal for the restaurant. After Straw informed Pete that the space was available for only $4,500 per month, Pete was tempted to take the offer. However, not wanting to make the same mistake twice, Pete asked Straw if he could have some time to think about it. Straw said "for all the work you did for me as a TA at only $5 per hour, I would be happy to keep the offer open for thirty days. Give me a call as soon as you decide." Two weeks later, Pete decided he wanted to take the space offered to him by Straw, but would only pay up to $4,000. He emailed Straw stating "I would like to accept your kind offer and will pay $4,000 per month." Two days later, after not hearing back from Straw and worried that he might lose the space, he emailed him again, stating "OK, fine, I will pay $4,500 for the space. When can we draw up the lease?" Straw called Pete moments later to tell him that he had already rented the space to someone else.

D Question 4 2.5 pts What is Straw's best argument that Pete did not properly accept Straw's offer? 0 No offer existed at the time of Pete's agreement to pay $4,500 because Pete had already rejected the offer. 0 Straw instructed Pete to call him to accept, and Pete emailed instead. 0 Pete lacked the legal capacity to accept the offer. 0 Straw had already revoked the offer by the time Pete agreed to pay $4,500. D Question 5 2.5 pts Did Straw have a separate contractual obligation to keep the offer open for a full 30 days? 0 No, the promise lacked consideration because Pete's work as a TA had occurred in the past. 0 No, because his promise to keep it open for 30 days was just puffery. 0 Yes, because Pete, in return for the promise to keep the offer open for 30 days, suffered a detriment in only earning $5 per hour as a TA. 0 Yes, because otherwise the situation would result in unjust enrichment of Straw. D Question 6 2.5 pts If Straw responded to Pete's second email by emailing back the following - "You can have the Space, but the rent is now $6,000 a month\" - does Pete have any claim against Straw? O No, because Straw's email is a new offer than Pete can either accept or reject. O Yes, based on the doctrine of unjust enrichment. O No, because Pete is an unsophisticated business person who doesn't understand commercial leasing. O Yes, because the parol evidence rule could be used to show that the original offer was $4,500 per month