Marsh v. Lott
California Court of Appeal
97 P. 163 (1908)
Relevant factsFree
Robt. Marsh & Co. (plaintiff) paid M.A. Lott (defendant) 25 cents for an option to purchase Lott's land for $100,000, exercisable up to June 1, 1905, with a possible 30-day extension. Marsh notified Lott on June 1 that he was extending the option, but Lott revoked it the next day; Marsh nonetheless paid Lott $30,000 under the original agreement on June 29 and sued for specific performance. The trial court found the 25-cent payment was inadequate consideration and ruled for Lott.
IssueFree
Whether an option contract is revocable due to inadequate consideration.
Related cases
Board of Control of Eastern Michigan University v. Burgess45 Mich.App. 183, 206 N.W.2d 256 (1973)United Virginia Bank/Citizens & Marine v. Union Oil Company of California197 S.E.2d 174 (1973)Cornerstone Equipment Leasing, Inc. v. MacLeod247 P.3d 790 (Wash. App. 2011)Lewis v. Premium Investment Corp.568 S.E.2d 361 (2002)Beall v. Beall413 A.2d 1365 (1980)