Question 1(4 points)

Bids and Estimates:Fletcher-Harlee Corp., a general contractor, solicited bids from subcontractors on various aspects of a building project for which it intended to compete. In response, Pote Concrete Contractors Inc. submitted a written price quotation for providing the concrete for the project. Pote, however, indicated that its price quotation was for informational purposes only. Did Pote's bid constitute a valid offer? [Fletcher-Harlee Corp. v. Pote Concrete Contractors, Inc., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 7808 (New Jersey)]

What is the Principle of Law?

What is the Decision?Who won the case?

Question 1 options:

Question 2(3 points)

CounterofferBrowne offered to sell Houlihan his recently purchased 50-inch plasma screen television set for $6,400. Houlihan sent Browne an e-mail message accepting the offer but asked if she could pay Browne in four equal monthly installments of $1,600. Browne did not acknowledge Houlihan's e-mail and instead sold the television set to Drew for $6,200. Houlihan then purchased a new set for $7,400 and sued Browne for $1,000, the difference in price. Did Houlihan and Browne have a valid contract, and will Houlihan be able to recover $1,000 from Browne?

What is the Principle of Law:

What is the Decision?Did they have a valid contract?

Question 3(4 points)

Silence as Acceptance:Bell Microproducts Inc. mailed to McGurn an offer of employment that stated that if McGurn was terminated without cause during the first 12 months of employment, he would receive a severance package worth $120,000. McGurn crossed out the number12, replaced it with the number24, and signed the contract. Bell did not acknowledge the change that had been made to the contract and hired the applicant. McGurn was terminated without cause 13 months later. Did Bell's silence as to McGurn's counteroffer amount to an acceptance? [McGurn v. Bell Microproducts, Inc., 284 F.3d 86 (Massachusetts).]

What is the Principle of Law?

Decision?

Question 4(4 points)

Valid Offer:Sanderson Mart ran an advertisement in the Daily Tribune that stated, "Special offer to our customers3/8-inch Electric Hand Drills, Saturday only$14.99, only 100 in stock, while they last! Be here when we open for the bargain of the year!" Cruz arrived at the store at 8:00 a.m. when the store opened. The salesperson refused to sell him an electric drill, claiming that he had only two in stock and those were already set aside for another customerand besides, the advertisement was not really a binding offer. Will Sanderson be required to sell the electric drill for the advertised price?

Principle of Law:

Decision: