Real Property
Issue
The legal issue here is to determine whether Brenda made an offer and if Amanda accepted the offer in order to formulate a binding contract between them. To find out whether there was a breach of contract, it is important to identify the elements of a contract to see whether this was valid or not. The problem lies in advising Amanda whether they are legally entitled to receive the reward or take action against Brenda, and in advising whether Brenda is legally bound by the contract.
Rule
Firstly, it is important to identify whether a contract was formed. Contracts are written are spoken agreements that govern the rights of parties to an agreement. In order for a contract to be valid, it is essential that there be an offer, acceptance, intention, and consideration. The offeror usually promises something; clearly either verbally, implied or in writing, in exchange for performance by another party. Once accepted, it generates an agreement between the parties. The acceptance that follows needs to be made clearly also; either verbally, implied or in writing. An intention shows that the parties to the contract have to accept the terms with the intent of forming a legally binding relationship. A consideration represents what the party brings. Additionally, common law highlights that it is the responsibility of every person to return lost personal property to its rightful owner. Lost property encapsulates any personal property that was unintentionally left by its real owner. Oregon law goes on to highlight that unclaimed property needs to be reported to the government and that the finders need to make diligent efforts to find the owners of the property. It goes on to highlight that; a lack of compliance with this law attracts civil penalties.
Application
• In the event that these two laws collide, the facts of the case may need to be critically examined.
• Upon finding Brenda’s object, yet Amanda has offered Brenda a reward for the return of the object; both Amanda and Brenda enter into a verbal contract. The elements of the contract include the offeror who is Brenda, the Offeree who is Amanda, the Reward which is the consideration, and the intention which is the return of the lost good.
• In this case, it is okay for Amanda to insist on the reward as a pre-condition for the return as it is essential for the conclusion of the agreement and validity of the contract. It also ensures that Brenda acknowledges the contractual counterparty.
• Due to the existence of Oregon laws governing lost property, it is also valid for Brenda to retract the reward due to Amanda’s pre-existing duty to return property before a reward is offered.
• Moreover, Supreme Court precedents exist as in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893) whereby Amanda is more likely to win a case against Brenda due to the existence of the precedents backed by contract law.
• As a result, the court is much more likely to rule in favor of Amanda receiving the reward that was promised by Brenda for fulfilling her end of the bargain.
Conclusion
Finally, upon communication with Amanda regarding the return of the lost item, Brenda promised Amanda a reward for the return of the item. In itself, that constituted a legal contract that is enforceable. Thus, regardless of the state laws of Oregon, Supreme Court legal precedents rule. Brenda must in that way pay Amanda the reward upon Amanda bringing the lost item.
References
Carlill, M. CARLILL vs. CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL CO.(1893) QBD v. 1, P. 256.
Oregon Department of State Lands. (n.d.). Complying with Oregon’s Unclaimed Property Law Complying with Oregon’s Unclaimed Property Law A step-by-step guide for businesses, public agencies and organizations. Retrieved from https://www.oregon.gov/dsl/Money/Documents/unclaimed_property_law_brochure_web.pdf
Thompson, V. (n.d.). Legal Precedent Vs. Contract Law. Retrieved from https://smallbusiness.chron.com/legal-precedent-vs-contract-law-71972.html
