Omni Group, Inc. v. Seattle-First National Bank

Omni Group, Inc. v. Seattle-First National Bank -...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Omni Group, Inc. v. Seattle-First National Bank 32 Wash. App. 22 (1982) Fact: Procedural Facts: Operative Facts: A Buyer was buying lot of property, while depositing the initial deposit, the buyer had the transaction subject to a feasibility report prepared by an engineer and architect, and the report was to be satisfactory to the buyer. Issue: Whether the terms of the contract made the consideration an illusionary consideration. Rule: Illusionary consideration is when it makes a consideration subjected to the whim of the party that the consideration belongs to. In all contracts, there must be a duty of good faith and reasonable efforts will be applied. Rational: There are two spots of issue in dispute. First is that the transaction is subjected to a feasibility report prepared by an engineer and an architect. This is common in the real estate
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: community, and imposes upon the buyer a duty to make a good faith effort to do so. Second, is that the report has to satisfy the buyers. The reasonable person standard could apply here, which makes the statement a question of fact, not a question of law. The two do not make the consideration an illusionary consideration. Holding: A condition that the agreement may be canceled by a specific contingency is not an illusionary consideration. Synthesis: Mattei v. Hopper (1958) A purchaser of a shopping center buildings included on his terms subject to obtaining leases satisfactory to the purchaser. It did not make it illusionary because the purchaser still has a duty to make it in good faith, and that doesnt make it illusionary. Dissent/Concurrences:...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online