If Letisha does not pay and Sudson sues her for breach of contract, what legal arguments could be raised in Letisha’s defense against the enforcement of the automatic renewal clause? * Letisha could argue that the salesman who brought her the contract to sign did not make her aware of the fact that there were other clauses to the contract that had been written at the back of the page. It is only professional for someone engaging another into signing a contract to go on and make the lessee aware that they should go through the entire document before signing it and there hence tying themselves to all conditions of the agreement. It is the sole discretion of the lessee to read the whole document or not through before signing. In Letisha’s case, the lesser did not abide by this rule since he did not make Letisha aware of any other written pages contained in the contract document; instead he just asked her to sign at the bottom of the first page and did the same.

What legal arguments could be raised by Sudson in support of the enforcement of the automatic renewal clause against Letisha? Explain. Sudson can argue that the lessee was feigning ignorance on her part and that is why she says that she was not aware of the contract terms. The lesser did engage the lessee in talking business and since she already is a businesswoman who engages others in written contracts as a landlord she should have known better than to sign a document that she had not read. Ignorance is not an excuse in law thus it was her prerogative as a businessperson to read the lease carefully even over a couple of days is she wanted before signing on the dotted line. Sudson is a business like any other and they engage in business deals that are favorable to them as an entity since they are out to make money and as such they should not be held accountable for the misjudgment on their client’s part. They