Unformatted text preview: information by Sorichetti that states Nevada law allows the rescission of real property purchase agreements within three days of contracting. Zhang agrees new consideration was added, but it was not valid because his bargaining was coerced with incorrect information about a non existing law. Sorichetti agrees that the contractual duties existed between them. Sorichetti argues that with consent from Zhang the contract was modified to include a new consideration, in return for paying $578,000 and a later vacancy date, Zhang would receive household furnishings drapes that were not listed in the original agreement. Sorichetti argues that the new considerations was a new price of $578,000, household furnishing drapes and an April date instead of March as closing date. Conclusion No the new contract was not enforceable because the elements of termination and new consideration were not met. Sorichetti coerced Zhang with incorrect information to sign a new agreement....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 03/28/2012 for the course BLAW 280 taught by Professor Ng during the Spring '11 term at CSU Northridge.
- Spring '11
- Business Law