[Pet Pig Farm] Jen was interested in buying Monique's land in order to breed small pet pigs. Jen told Monique that having water on the property was very important although she did not mention to Monique her plan to breed small pigs. Monique assured her that a spring ran through one corner of the property. Therefore, Jen agreed to buy the farm. Jen, who loved pigs, assumed that the neighbors would be pleased with the pigs being in the area. Monique also agreed to sell Jen a used truck for $5,000. After the contract for the land sale was entered into, Jen had a land survey done, and it was discovered that the spring did not actually run through the corner of Monique's property. The area in which the spring ran belonged to a neighbor. Additionally, when Monique brought Jen the used truck, Jen said, "That's not the truck!" It was discovered that Monique, who had two trucks, thought that Jen had bought the older truck although Jen thought she had purchased the newer truck. Jen was also surprised when she received a petition signed by all surrounding landowners objecting to the presence of the pigs and threatening to sue Jen for nuisance. It will cost Jen more than she had agreed to pay Monique in order for Jen to obtain a similar farm that has a spring within its legal boundaries.
-Which result is most likely in the dispute between Jen and Monique regarding which used truck was sold, assuming that both Jen and Monique were innocently mistaken and did not intend to defraud the other?

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The contract for the truck will likely be rescinded due to mutual mistake. Both parties were under a mistaken belief about a basic assumption on which the contract was made (which truck was being sold), and this mistake had a material effect on the agreed exchange. Since neither party intended to defraud the other and they cannot agree on which truck was being sold, rescission is the most equitable remedy.

[Pet Pig Farm] Jen Was Interested in Buying Monique's Land