Legal Question in Personal Injury in California

Leslie wrote to Tom on December 1, 1998 in an undated letter saying, �I will lease to you my house for a year, while I am away in Europe. You can have the house beginning on January 1, 1999. Write me with your answer within one week.� Although Leslie mailed the letter December 1, it was misplaced for 10 days by the postal service. Thus, it was postmarked December 11 and was delivered to Tom on December 12. The envelope bore no markings on it indicating the misplacement at the post office. But for its misplacement, the letter would have been delivered on December 2. On the morning of December 14, Tom mailed a letter back to Leslie, which stated, �I accept your offer. Please be sure all the locks and built-in appliances are in good working order.� The postal service lost Tom�s letter, which was properly addressed and stamped. Accordingly, it was never delivered to Leslie.

Meanwhile, on December 10, Leslie leased the house to Xerxes for calendar year 1999. Tom showed up at the house mid-morning on January 1, with a moving van he had rented full of his possessions. Unfortunately for Tom, Xerxes had already moved in. Once Tom assured himself that Xerxes had a lease, he drove straight to his lawyer. The lawyer told Tom that Tom had no claim against Leslie. (Do not necessarily assume the lawyer was competent.) Tom nevertheless sent a demand letter to Leslie, demanding $5,000 in damages to settle his breach of contract claim. Leslie responded with the following letter:

Dear Tom:

I will agree to pay you $600 in full settlement of any claim you may have against me.

/s/ Leslie

Tom immediately mailed a reply, stating, �I agree to your terms.�

Leslie never paid Tom anything, so Tom sued Leslie.

Assume the state landlord-tenant law requires landlords to have rented premises in �safe and decent condition� before renting them.

Discuss the following questions:

1.Did Tom have a valid contract to lease the house?

2.If Tom did not have a valid contract to lease the house, can he recover the $600 from Leslie?


Asked on 8/23/12, 7:29 am

3 Answers from Attorneys

1. No, because the Rule in Shelly's Case made him an unvested remainderman due to the Rule Against Perpetuities.

2. Only if he sues in small claims court and the Commissioner is a former student who tried to cheat on their class work by getting LawGuru.com lawyers to do their work for them.

Read more
Answered on 8/23/12, 7:42 am
Michael Stone-Molloy The Lion's Law Office

1. This is a forum about personal injury. Your question is about contracts.

2. This is a website for real people with real problems, not law students trying to cheat

Read more
Answered on 8/23/12, 8:12 am

Good point, Mr. Stone-Molloy. I didn't even notice that this cheating little weasel doesn't even know the difference between a Torts question and a Contracts question.

Read more
Answered on 8/23/12, 11:33 pm


Related Questions & Answers

More Personal Injury Law and Tort Law questions and answers in California