The case of Lucy v. Zehmer, involving whether or not there was assent to a contract or whether allegations of joking prevented the formation of the contract, what did the court determine?
A) The court ruled that the contract would not be enforced because one of the parties was subjectively joking and that both the Zehmers testified they were joking.
B) The court ruled that the contract would not be enforced because one of the parties was joking, and a reasonable person should have known that.
C) The court ruled that the contract would not be enforced because the parties had been drinking and although they were not intoxicated, there was still no mutual assent.
D) The court ruled that the agreement would be enforced because under the applicable standard, the words and acts, judged by a reasonable standard, manifested an intention to be bound.
E) The court ruled that the contract would be enforced because of what the parties verbally said regardless of whether an objective person would have thought joking was involved.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The court in Lucy v. Zehmer ruled that the agreement would be enforced because, under objective standards (what a reasonable person would have thought), the actions and words of the parties indicated an intention to be bound by the contract, despite Zehmer's claims that he was joking.

The Case of Lucy V