Legal Question in Business Law in Nevada

Re: Email - Contractual Obligations

An agreement to purchase and an intent to purchase are two different things. If either will constitute a contract will depend on the underlying and contained facts in the emails between the parties.

Its not cut and dry.

Re: Email - Contractual Obligations

Great question. The easiest answer would be if both parties sign an identical contract, then scan their signed contracts and e-mail them to each other.

However, I believe a binding contract could be also be formed if there is a clear agreement evidenced by an exchange of ordinary text e-mail.

I would worry about the contract being too vague as many e-mail are written without much thought. I would prefer to see the contract as a carefully thought out Word or other attachement with clear e-mail texts about complete acceptance by both parties.

Suppose Party A sends a carefully drafted contract to Party B. Party B replies, "Great, let's do it. I just have a little problem with Paragraph 12 I'm sure that won't be a problem." In this case, I don't think it would be clear that there is a contract.

Re: Email - Contractual Obligations

The "law school exam" answer would question whether there was a meeting of the minds evidenced by the email. Was there a clear offer? Was it met with an unequivocal acceptance? Is there a promise of real consideration (payment)? Were the terms sufficiently clear to allow a third party (like, a judge) to enforce them? Are the parties actually capable of performing as promised?

If all these elements are present, there is a contract, but for one detail. The "Statute of Frauds" requires that a contract for real estate be signed by the party to be charged. In other words, if you seek to enforce the contract against the owner of the real estate (or, alternatively, against the purchaser who, presumably, is capable of paying), you have to wave his/her signature under the nose of the judge.

So, what is missing?