Financial- Cromwell, Samuel (Previous Tenant)

Home Browse Search

`'...~ r..r: On February 18, we spoke again on the phone and she informed me that Mr. Berry had approved the apartment at 1488 State Street at the $365.00 rate. On Wednesday (2/18/97) I looked at the apartment after contacting and organizing a meeting with the apartment's broker. I informed Ms. Andrews that I looked at the apartment and that I may not take that specific apartment (as is my option per the statute) but stated $365.00 was an acceptable rate for determining the settlement and that I was ready to sign the necessary documents establishing that her organization had offered the available apartment. On February 21, 1997 I went to Ms. Andrew's place of business to sign our agreement. She then informed me that, once again, she intended to rescind the coiitract. We discussed the matter. I did not sign the document which used in its formulation the lesser rent base of $295.00. This is where matters stood up until I received the letter dated February 26, 1997. In this letter, Ms. Andrews states: "Since you did not act on this apartment (the apartment at the $365 rate), the offer became null and void." This statement is untrue. I"acted" in every way possible. I looked at the apartment, then arranged to sign the appropriate documents. Nothing else with regards to this apartment could be done or needed to be done on my part. There is nothing in the statute that requires me to actually lease the apartment, as we have discussed numerous times. Ms. Andrew's reasoning defies logic. In what manner could a person "act on" an available apartment without actually leasing it? Am I to assume that her initial offer is null and void when I did everything possible to "act on" it, and her second offer is still an open offer when I have done nothing with regards to it? This does not make sense. With regard to the oral contract, calling it a"benefit" does not take it out of the realm of contract law. It may be a benefit, but, as Black's Law Dictionary states, "V1hen it is said that a valuable consideration for a promise may consist of a benefit to the promisor, `benefit' means that the promisor has, in return for his promise, acquired some legal right to which he would not otherwise have been entitled." Blacks Law Dictionarv 108 (6th ed. 1991). That legal right is binding. There can be no dispute that a contract was made by Ms. Andrews (as your agent) and myself. "A contract is a promise or a set of promises for the breach of which the law gives a remedy...." Restatement (Second) of Contracts §1 (1990). She made me an offer (the $365.00 apartment as a baseline figure). I accepted. If the benefit were a gift without consideration there would be no contract. Schnell v. Nell, 17 Ind. 29, 79 Am.Dec. 453 (1861). However, there is ample consideration, my eviction. There is a binding contract. 2