In late 2010 or early 2011, the plaintiff, Lan England, agreed to sell 258,363 shares of stock
Question:
In December 2013, the plaintiff made a demand for the 2 percent stock, but the defendant refused, contending that the 2percent agreement was meant only to secure his payment of the additional $25,000. The plaintiff sued for breach of the 2 percent agreement. Prior to trial, the defendant discovered additional business records documenting that he had, before entering into the second agreement, actually overpaid the plaintiff for the purchase of the stock. The defendant asserts the plaintiff could not enforce the second agreement as an accord and satisfaction because (1) It was not supported by consideration, and
(2) It was based upon a mutual mistake that the defendant owed additional money on the original agreement.
Is the defendant correct in his assertions? Explain.
Fantastic news! We've Found the answer you've been seeking!
Step by Step Answer:
Related Book For
Smith and Robersons Business Law
ISBN: 978-0538473637
16th edition
Authors: Richard A. Mann, Barry S. Roberts
Question Posted: