The owner of an award-winning thoroughbred racehorse sent an e-mail to a horse breeder offering to sell him the horse for $80,000 if he bought the horse before November 15. The breeder was extremely knowledgeable about horses and knew that comparable horses were being sold for $100,000. On November 1, just as the breeder was headed to his bank to get a certified check for the purchase of the horse, he received another e-mail from the owner stating that he had changed his mind and the horse was no longer for sale. The breeder got the check and drove to the owner’s stable anyway, where he saw a “horse for sale” sign nailed to the outside of the horse’s stall. The breeder located the owner behind the stable, tendered the $80,000 certified check, and demanded the horse. The owner refused. If the breeder brings an action seeking damages for breach of contract against the horse owner, what is his likely recovery?

A retiring dentist entered into a written agreement with an agent whereby the agent would receive a commission of 10% of the sale price if he procured a “ready, willing, and able buyer” for the purchase of the dentist’s dental practice and if the sale of the practice actually occurred. The agent found a buyer who agreed in writing to buy the practice from the dentist for $500,000, the dentist’s asking price. The buyer put up $30,000 as a down payment. The agreement between the dentist and the buyer contained a liquidated damages clause providing that, if the buyer defaulted by failing to tender the balance due of $470,000 within 60 days, damages would be 10% of the purchase price. The dentist included that clause because she was counting on using the proceeds of the sale for another business venture that would likely net her at least $50,000. The buyer became seriously ill and defaulted. When he recovered, he demanded that the dentist return his $30,000, but the dentist refused. The agent also demanded the $30,000 from the dentist and was refused. The agent and the buyer filed separate suits against the dentist, with the buyer pleading impossibility of performance. The two cases are consolidated into a single case. How should the court rule as to the disposition of the $30,000?

On April 1, a landscaper read an ad in a trade magazine from a nursery offering a new variety of hydrangea bushes for $40 per bush. The landscaper immediately filled out the order form included in the ad ordering 10 bushes and deposited it, properly stamped and addressed, into the mail. On April 2, the landscaper received in the mail a letter from the same nursery, sent out as part of its advertising campaign, stating in relevant part that it will sell the landscaper 10 hydrangea bushes at $40 per bush. A day later, on April 3, the nursery received the landscaper’s order. On April 4, the bushes were shipped. On what day did an enforceable contract arise?

Solve the problem.How much work does it take to slide a box 44 meters along the ground by pulling it with a 125 N force at an angle of 45° from the horizontal?

A boy was playing softball in a neighborhood park when a ball was hit over the fence and into a neighbor’s yard. The boy knocked on the neighbor’s door and obtained permission from her to retrieve the ball from her yard. As he bent to retrieve the ball in some bushes, the boy brushed against an exposed electric wire that was partially hidden by the bushes and received a severe electric shock and burns. The neighbor had failed to maintain the bushes, allowing them to become overgrown, and was not aware of the exposed wire. If the boy sues the neighbor in a jurisdiction that applies the traditional rules for landowners and possessors of land, what is the likely result?

To fight drug abuse, a state enacted a statute forbidding the selling of model airplane glue to anyone under the age of 18 except in small quantities in prepackaged model kits. Violation of the statute was penalized by fines or, in cases of multiple violations, possible imprisonment. The statute also required that all elementary and secondary schools licensed by the state provide comprehensive drug education programs. Neither the legislature nor the courts of the state have abolished the common law tort defense of assumption of the risk. The owner of a hobby shop in the state sold a large tube of airplane glue to a 15-year-old boy who reasonably appeared to be at least 18 years old. The boy had received drug education in his school, as mandated by the statute, including coverage of the dangers of glue sniffing. The boy understood the anti-drug instruction, but he wanted to experience it for himself. The boy sniffed the glue repeatedly and suffered permanent brain damage. If the boy’s parents file suit on the boy’s behalf against the store owner, for whom is the court likely to rule?

A woman gifted her house to her niece by quitclaim deed. The niece promptly and properly recorded her deed. A year later, the woman conveyed the same house to a neighbor for $75,000 by warranty deed, which was promptly and properly recorded. As between the niece and the neighbor, who has the superior right to title to the house?

A woman entered into a written contract to sell her office building to an investor. A week before the date set for closing, the investor decided to buy a hotel in a neighboring town instead. The investor notified the woman that he would not be going through with the closing. The woman sued the investor for specific performance. Which fact, if true, would likely cause the court to rule in the investor’s favor?

A man and his nephew lived and worked together on the man’s ranch for 15 years. The man developed severe arthritis as he grew older, and the nephew took over the daily work of running the ranch. The man told his nephew that he wanted to be sure that the ranch would go to the nephew when the man died, so he gave the nephew a quitclaim deed. The nephew did not record the deed, but locked it in a drawer in his desk. Six months later, the man’s daughter learned about this. She asked her father to sell the ranch to her, saying he could continue to live there for the rest of his life. The daughter offered her father a good sum of money for the ranch, so the man agreed. The man and his daughter closed on the sale the next day. The man then told the nephew that he had changed his mind and decided to leave the ranch to his grandchildren. The nephew promised to destroy the deed, and the next week, he did. A month later, however, there was an accident at the ranch and the man and the nephew both died. The man died intestate and was survived by three children, including his daughter. The man’s heirs, the nephew’s heirs, and the daughter claim title to the ranch. The jurisdiction has a notice recording statute. If the nephew’s heirs bring an appropriate action to quiet title to the ranch, who is likely to prevail?

In exchange for a share of the profits, a woman conveyed her densely forested tract of land to a logging company by warranty deed. The logging company did not record its deed. Afraid her friends and family would think she made a bad business decision, the woman kept the transaction with the logging company to herself. Prior to felling any trees, the logging company abandoned its project and returned the deed to the woman. Then, in exchange for half the tract’s market value, the woman executed and delivered a quitclaim deed to the tract to her friend. The friend intended to record the deed but forgot. Subsequently, the logging company decided to proceed with its original logging project on the land. The jurisdiction has the following recording act: A conveyance of an interest in land shall not be valid against any subsequent purchaser for value, without notice thereof, unless the conveyance is recorded. In a suit between the logging company and the friend to quiet title, who is likely to prevail?