Orlowski v. Moore Facts: (D) owned a piece of land that they wanted to sell for $5500 o they could not so they rented it for $35 per month to the (P). Lease said in writing that the (P) had first chance to buy the land. (D) notified prior to lease that they intended to sell the land. Apollo Trust CO. wanted to buy the land for $5000. o Immediately (D) notified (P) and gave him first chance. o (P) had not paid rent in three months. He notified (D) that he wanted the lnad but he was unable to secure a loan at this point. (D) sold the land o before title had cleared, (P) told (D) that he had secured the money to buy the land. Issue: Did the (D) had rwait a reasonable time to sell the land? Did the (D) give reasonable opportunity to the (P) to purchase the property? Rule: Where no time is specified for the performance of an act, the law implies that it must be done within a reasonable time, and what a reasonable time depends entirely upon the circumstances of each case. Reasoning: Court ruled for (D) because it was reasonable that the (P) could not come up with the money.
United States v. Hendricks Facts: U.S. filed suit against Hendricks for fair housing act violations March 15 --(D) mailed a Rule 68 offer of judgment to (P) where they proposed to settle the case for $2900. o March 31 (P) inquired if (D) would be willing to settle for $4000. o (D) stated they would not April 1 – (P) served (D) by mail stating they would accept the $2900 offer. o (P) filed notice with Court that a settlement had been reached. (D) have now moved to invalidate (P) acceptance on grounds that 1) the time period for acceptance of the offer of judgment had expired and 2) plaintiff had already rejected (D) initial offer. Issue: Did the (P) accept offer under the time required? Did the (P) counter offer negate the initial offer? Rule 68 – A (P) has 10 days in which to accept an offer of judgment and does not include day of service or weekends or holidays.
A counter offer does not negate an old offer if that offer is irrevocable Courts have ruled that offers made under Rule 68 are irrevocable. Reasoning: Judgment in favor of the (P) because the offer was made in time and it was an irrevocable offer so a counter offer does not apply.