P 205 case 7
Mary McDonald, an 86-year-old woman, was frequently complaining about the high cost of maintenance of her house and high property taxes. She decided to cancel her fire insurance to reduce expenses. Mary’s daughter was aware of her mother’s concern about the property, and she took Mary to the lawyer’s office to sign some papers that would protect her mother. When Mary came to the lawyer’s office, she was advised that the paper she was going to sign was the deed to the property. Mary signed a document. Later on, when the municipal tax bill arrived, Mary McDonald was really surprised to see that the property was in her daughter’s name. The mistake occurred. Mary McDonald entered into an agreement in such a way that the contract did not express her true intensions. She thought that the paper she signed was the cancellation of her fire insurance. The mistake that happened is unilateral mistake, as only Mary did not recognize what was she signing. The mistake occurred due to Mary’s own negligence. Mary’s daughter is a real-estate agent and the court might rescind the contract to protect an old woman in case Mary’s daughter might has an intention to sell her mother’s house. Also, the court might take into consideration Mary’s age and her trust in her daughter, that’s why she did not read the contract carefully and signed something she did not mean to sign. From Mary’s daughter point of view, she might say that her mother was aware of what she was signing, and she can try to prove that she did not mean anything bad, she just tried to help her mother to take care of her property as the woman is getting old. The court will take Mary’s side and the contract will be cancelled.
P 233 case 2
Hamish, an experienced painting contractor, entered into an agreement with Mr. McPhail to paint the McPhail residence both inside and out for $3200. By the fifth day, he painted all of the house except the eavestroughs and down-spouts. Mr. McPhail refused to pay...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document