CASE 1

Shane Durbin wanted to have a recording studio custom-built in his home. He sent
invitations to a number of local contractors to submit bids on the project. Rory Amstel
submitted the lowest bid, which was $20,000 less than any of the other bids Durbin
received. Durbin called Amstel to ascertain the type and quality of the materials that were
included in the bid and to find out if he could substitute a superior brand of acoustic tiles
for the same bid price. Amstel said he would have to check into the price difference. The
parties also discussed a possible start date for construction. Two weeks later, Durbin
changed his mind and decided not to go forward with his plan to build a recording studio.
Amstel filed a suit against Durbin for breach of contract. 
1. Did Amstel’s bid meet the requirements of an offer? Explain. 
2. Was there an acceptance of the offer? Why or why not? 
CASE 2
In April, the defendant, Mr Montefiore, wanted to purchase shares in the complainant’s
Ramsgate Victoria Hotel. He put in his offer to the complainant and paid a deposit to his bank
account to buy them in June. This was for a certain price. He did not hear anything until six
months later, when the offer was accepted and he received a letter of acceptance from the
complainant. By this time, the value of shares had dropped and the defendant was no longer
interested. Mr Montefiore had not withdrawn his offer, but he did not go through with the sale.
The complainant brought an action for specific performance of the contract against the
defendant.

1. Was Ramsgate Victoria Hotel's act of denunciation against Mr Montefiore valid?

2. Was there a contract between the parties after the acceptance of the original offer? Why
or why not?
CASE 3

Kentucky Lottery Corporation (the Lottery) operates the state’s lottery. In one of the
Lottery’s contests, a scratch-off ticket that revealed a “Final Top Prize” symbol could be
entered into an online drawing to win $175,000. Individuals could register for an online
account and enter the contest on the Lottery’s website. The contest’s rules required an
entrant to provide a valid phone number and mailing address and to keep them current. If
the winner could not be reached within seven days after the drawing, he or she would be
disqualified.
Brett Bailey established an online account and entered several scratch-off tickets in the
contest. He provided a mailing address, which was not correct, and before the drawing,
he changed his phone number without notifying the Lottery. Bailey’s ticket won the
drawing, but the Lottery was unable to reach him. After expiration of the contest’s seven-
day period, the $175,000 prize was awarded to an eligible alternate. Later, Bailey filed a
suit in a Kentucky state court against the Lottery, claiming breach of contract. The court
granted a summary judgement to the defendant. Bailey appealed.

1. Bailey joined the Fun Club Rewards program and entered several eligible scratch-off
lottery tickets as chances to win the “Final Top Prize” [“FTP”] promotion. He did so by
providing information on the lottery’s website and by agreeing to the terms of use and to
all other rules and regulations that applied to online account holders.
2. The Lottery’s rules did not provide for entrants to be notified by e-mail, but contracts
generally impose on the parties a duty to do everything necessary to carry out the
contracts’ provisions. Did the Lottery breach its contract with Bailey by not notifying him
by e-mail? Explain.
3. Suppose that Bailey had complied with the Lottery’s rules by keeping his address and
phone number current, but that the Lottery had not tried to notify him before the
expiration of the seven-day period. Would the result have been different? Why or why
not?