100%(13)13 out of 13 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 2 - 5 out of 6 pages.
LEONARD AND THE HARRIER JETA key reason for Judge Wood’s ruling was that there was clearly an absence of a unilateral offer and therefore he allowed Pepsico the right of revocation, which is ultimately the denial of the offer (Chrisman, 2015). This is important because a unilateral offer is one in which is offered to a large population and not just one consumer or party and is typically binding, so long that the consumer performs an array of acts according to the offer’s instructions without continuing negotiation (Gale Group, 2008). For instance, a true unilateral offer would be illustrated if someone posted a “Wanted” sign for a missing person that included a reward of one-thousand dollars. This is an offer made to a large population and if a member of the larger population were able to complete all the acts to provide what was “Wanted” then they would be entitled to the reward without much post-negotiation or argument. In other words, it only takes one promise from the offeror, followed by one act, which is contingent upon one final act from the offeror before the reward is released (Chrisman, 2015). However, in this case I would agree with Judge Wood’s decision regarding the lack of a unilateral offer for two reasons. One being that at the bottom of the commercial it was clearly stated that the Pepsico offer was only valid in specific locations, thus it does not specify that it was an offer to the entire public. Secondly, therewas a prior precedent set by Mesaros v. United States in 1988, that an advertisement is not necessarily enforceable solely based on the willingness of a party, in this case Pepsico, Inc., to accept the order form (S.D.N.Y, 1999). Therefore, I agree with the upholding based on the fact that there was already a precedent from a prior court case, in addition, I agree that there was a lack of a unilateral offer. Another reason that I would uphold the court’s ruling to deny Mr. Leonard the Harrier Jetis due to the context of the advertisement relevant to the style of the commercial as well as the reasonable person standard. The commercial advertisement was analyzed thoroughly and it was 3
LEONARD AND THE HARRIER JETclear that while the majority of the items in the commercial could be ordered, the Harrier Jet was to help illustrate the style of the commercial. In the commercial the young man displays sunglasses and a leather jacket, and to most objective individuals it was obvious that the style of