Question

Sue Ellen's parents recently passed away and have left her property that she has decided to sell because she has no use for it. When she lists the property for $250,000, she receives a lot of interest from potential buyers. One buyer approaches her and offers to pay only $175,000 for the property. When Sue Ellen declines the offer, the buyer tells her that he has evidence that her parents used this property to conduct illegal activities, and that he will reveal this to law enforcement if she does not sell him the property for the price that he asks for. She agrees to sell it to him for that price.

a. Is Sue Ellen's agreement to sell her parents' property at a lower price than she asked for void, voidable, or binding?
b. What makes this contract void, voidable, or binding?

A) a. The agreement is void.
b. The presence of evidence of illegal activities makes it void.
B) a. The agreement is binding.
b. The threat of revealing illegal activities makes it binding.
C) a. The agreement is voidable.
b. The threat of revealing illegal activities makes it voidable.
D) a. The agreement is void.
b. The buyer's offer to reveal illegal activities makes it void.

Answer 1

Sue Ellen's agreement to sell the property at a lower price than asked is voidable due to the buyer's coercive threats of revealing her parents' illegal activities. The contract entered under duress gives her the right to rescind it.

Step-by-step explanation:

The agreement between Sue Ellen and the buyer is voidable. This means that Sue Ellen has the option to either enforce or rescind the contract. The contract is considered voidable because the buyer's offer was made under duress. Sue Ellen was threatened with exposure of her parents' alleged illegal activities, which is a form of coercion. In contract law, agreements entered into under duress can be invalidated because one party has been forced into the contract against their free will. Therefore, the threat of revealing illegal activities makes it voidable, not automatically void.