6-1 Case Analysis Lucy v. Zehmer BUS206
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Southern New Hampshire University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
206
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by GrandLeopard2382
In the case of Lucy v. Zehmer, the contractual element that Zehmer contended was missing was
intent. (Lucy v. Zehmer | Case Brief for Law Students | Casebriefs, n.d.). Zehmer argued that
neither party had intended to enter into a serious agreement but rather, they were merely joking
on a night out drinking when they had this discussion and signed the contract. This is the very
thing he argued to try and prove that this contract is null and void. With the intent of not being
there how can this be held up in the courts. The mental capacity was not there, seeing as how
both parties were under the influence.
The mental assent of the parties is not requisite for the formation of a contract. If the words or
other acts of one of the parties have but one reasonable meaning, his undisclosed intention is
immaterial except when an unreasonable meaning which he attaches to his manifestations is
known to the other party.
(Lucy v. Zehmer | Case Brief for Law Students | Casebriefs, n.d.).
The
court ruled in favor of the complainants under the objective theory of contracts and concluded
that a person's mental assent was not a requisite for the formation of a contract.
I agree with the ruling because regardless of whether Zehmer was drunk at the time, the court
ruled that both parties agreed to the sale of the farm because Zehmer's outward behavior was
sober enough for a reasonable person to believe he intended to sell it.
(Lucy v. Zehmer | Case
Brief for Law Students | Casebriefs, n.d.).
So, because of this, both parties made this agreement
regardless of their being under the influence, even though under certain circumstances being
under the influence would be grounds for dismissal. But both parties agreed upon this and so the
contract remains.
To be honest, other than having car loans and mortgage, I cannot think of a time where I entered
any personal contacts and did not know I was entering into one. I am a person who always reads
the fine print before signing anything. I like to ask questions because if it does not make sense to
me then I am not doing it. You must understand things before entering something. Contracts are
like a marriage, it is something to get into quickly but hard to get out of LOL, if you know what I
mean. It can cause you to lose things that you worked so hard to obtain, and in a blink of eye it is
gone. I make it a personal thing to understand all contracts.
References:
Lucy v. Zehmer | Case Brief for Law Students | Casebriefs. (n.d.).
https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/contracts/contracts-keyed-to-murphy/the-bargain-
relationship/lucy-v-zehmer-2/#:~:text=The%20mental%20assent%20of%20the
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help