Case Review/IRAC
Case Citation

John D.R. Leonard, Plaintiff v. Pepsico, Inc., Defendant
88 F.Supp.2d 116 (1999)

Key Facts

Pepsico conducted a test of a new promotion in the Pacific Northwest from October 1995 to March 1996 where plaintiff saw the advertisement and contended that it offered a Harrier Jet. Through acquaintances, plaintiff raised $700,000, and wrote a check to Pepsi along with 15 pepsi points and a filled out order form for 7,000,000 additional Pepsi points. Defendant’s fulfillment house rejected plaintiff’s submission. Plaintiff’s counsel responded on May 14th, 1996 forewarning that they will file an appropriate action if they do not fulfill their offer of a Harrier Jet.

Procedural History

This case went straight to the United States District Court.

Legal Issue

Whether the television commercial constituted an offer of a Harrier Jet.

Legal Reasoning

Although the plaintiff filled out the Order Form with a check, etc.;
-Under these principles, plaintiff’s letter of March 27, 1996, with the Order Form and the appropriate number of Pepsi Points, constituted the offer. There would be no enforceable contract until defendant accepted the Order Form and cashed the check.
-The commercial cannot be regarded in itself as sufficiently definite, because it specifically reserved the details of the offer to a separate writing, the Catalog.
-As the Mesaro’s court explained, the absence of any words of limitation such as “first come, first served,” renders the alleged offer sufficiently indefinite that no contract could be formed.
*The court found, in sum, that the Harrier Jet commercial was merely an advertisement.

In the Carbolic Smoke Ball case, the advertisement was construed as offering a reward because it sought to induce performance, unlike an invitation to negotiate, which seeks a reciprocal promise.
-In the case of