Answered step by step
Verified Expert Solution
Question
1 Approved Answer
Plaintiff Polly hired Defendant Dan to sell 500 acres of Plaintiff Pollys land and all the farming equipment on Plaintiff Pollys property. Defendant Dan told
Plaintiff Polly hired Defendant Dan to sell 500 acres of Plaintiff Pollys land and all the farming
equipment on Plaintiff Pollys property. Defendant Dan told Plaintiff Polly he was a real estate
expert, even though Defendant Dan had never sold a single property and was unlicensed.
Defendant Dan learned his skills from online videos. Defendant Dan provided Plaintiff Polly with
a standard form agreement that charged Plaintiff Polly twice the normal commission rate of an
entry-level real estate Defendant Dan. The contract stated Defendant Dans duties are
complete after the deal is closed. Plaintiff Polly asked the Defendant Dan to explain the
contract because Plaintiff Polly had limited literacy. Defendant Dan told Plaintiff Polly, Dont
worry. This form is just a formality. Plaintiff Polly signed the contract. Defendant Dan posted
Plaintiff Pollys land on the market.
After six months, Defendant Dan arranged a meeting between Plaintiff Polly and a potential
Potential Purchaser to discuss the terms of a purchase, but Potential Purchaser never showed
up. Defendant Dan went to the Potential Purchasers home. When Potential Purchaser opened
the door, Defendant Dan said, You better close this deal with Plaintiff Polly or youll be sorry.
Defendant Dan shoved the contract in Potential Purchasers face and held out a pen.
Potential Purchaser, who was only 17 years old, was scared by Defendant Dans threats and
immediately signed the contract. Potential Purchaser never paid Plaintiff Polly any money.
Three weeks later, Potential Purchaser called Plaintiff Polly and said they no longer wanted the
land. Plaintiff Polly asked Defendant Dan to continue selling the land, but Defendant Dan told
Plaintiff Polly that he no longer did real estate and claimed the deal closed when Potential
Purchaser signed the contract. Plaintiff Polly called Defendant Dan a fraud because Plaintiff
Polly believed Defendant Dans duties were not completed until Plaintiff Polly received the
money from the sale. What UCC implications do you see, explain and articulate.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started