Boise Junior College District v. Mattefs Construction Co. case brief
450 P.2d 604 (1969)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Appellant sought review of the trial court's determination that respondent was entitled to the equitable relief of rescission on the basis of mistake.
OVERVIEW: Respondent construction company submitted a bid proposal to appellant, accompanied by a bid bond, which contained a promise to pay the difference between the bid and the next higher bid if respondent refused to enter into a contract with appellant. Shortly after the bids were opened, respondent notified appellant that its bid contained an error, the omission of an item constituting 14% of the total bid. Appellant contracted with a higher bidder, sought to collect on respondent's bond, and challenged the trial court's granting of the equitable remedy of rescission.
HOLDING
In affirming the lower court's ruling, the court concluded that the error was material, resulted from a clerical oversight, and was promptly communicated to appellant.
ANALYSIS:
Appellant suffered no prejudice as a result, and enforcement would constitute a substantial hardship on respondent; therefore, rescission was appropriate.
OUTCOME: The judgment of rescission was affirmed as the respondent's material mistake resulted from a clerical oversight, appellant was promptly notified of the mistake, and enforcement would have resulted in a substantial hardship to respondent.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
450 P.2d 604 (1969)
CASE SYNOPSIS:
Appellant sought review of the trial court's determination that respondent was entitled to the equitable relief of rescission on the basis of mistake.
OVERVIEW: Respondent construction company submitted a bid proposal to appellant, accompanied by a bid bond, which contained a promise to pay the difference between the bid and the next higher bid if respondent refused to enter into a contract with appellant. Shortly after the bids were opened, respondent notified appellant that its bid contained an error, the omission of an item constituting 14% of the total bid. Appellant contracted with a higher bidder, sought to collect on respondent's bond, and challenged the trial court's granting of the equitable remedy of rescission.
HOLDING
In affirming the lower court's ruling, the court concluded that the error was material, resulted from a clerical oversight, and was promptly communicated to appellant.
ANALYSIS:
Appellant suffered no prejudice as a result, and enforcement would constitute a substantial hardship on respondent; therefore, rescission was appropriate.
OUTCOME: The judgment of rescission was affirmed as the respondent's material mistake resulted from a clerical oversight, appellant was promptly notified of the mistake, and enforcement would have resulted in a substantial hardship to respondent.
---
Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?
-->
No comments:
Post a Comment