Aishwarya Kalimireddy

Mr. Noblett 

Business Law

4/30/2019 

Lucy v. Zehmer

FACTS: The plaintiff, Lucy, offered to pay $50,000 for the defendant, Zehmer’s, farm. A

statement was given to Lucy by Zehmer for a signature. It stated that the defendant was to sell

his farm to the plaintiff for $50,000, written by Zehmer and signed by Lucy and Zehmer’s wife.

When the time came to give up the farm for the $50,000 presented to him, Zehmer refused,

arguing that he was intoxicated and the statement was a joke. The plaintiff sued the defendant for

breach of contract.

Issue : Is the contract valid without the defendant’s serious intent?

Rule : An agreement or mutual assent to a valid contract but the law imputes to a person an

intention corresponding to the reasonable meaning of his words and acts. If his words and acts,

judged by a reasonable standard, manifest an intention to agree, it is immaterial what may be the

real but unexpressed state of his mind.

Application : The evidence showed the Plaintiff was warranted in believing the contract

represented a serious business transaction and a good faith sale and purchase of the farm.  A

person cannot say he was joking when his words and conduct would result in a reasonable person

believing it was a valid agreement

Conclusion : The Supreme Court of Virginia ruled in favor of Lucy, reversing the verdict of the

lower court. An order was given to the defendant to sell his farm to the plaintiff as the sellers'
true intent in agreeing to sell their farm was not determinative so long as their words and actions

warranted a reasonable person's belief that a contract was intended to happen.