Normile and Kurniawan v. Miller; Segal v. Miller
3313 N.C. 98; 326 S.E.2d 11; 1985 N.C. LEXIS 1521
Facts: Plaintiff-appellants (Normile) made an offer on the defendant (Miller) seller’s home. Defendant responded with a counter-offer. The plaintiff never accepted or rejected the counter-offer and believed the house was still on the market. The next day the defendant sold the house to the plaintiff-appellee (Segal). The plaintiff-appellants are suing for specific performance, as did the plantiff-appllee, in separate actions which were consolidated by the lower court. The counter-offer by the defendant did not constitute a binding and enforceable contract. The defendant then properly revoked the counter-offer by selling the property to plaintiff-appellee and thus gave plaintiff-appellants notice of that revocation.
Procedural history: Appealed from Court of Appeals for North Carolina. Currently at Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Issue: Was there a clear offer and acceptance between Normile and Miller?
Holding: No, Miller’s counteroffer was a revoke of Normile’s offer since it was never accepted by both parties and was not a mirror image contract.
Rule of Law: An offer is a promise to do something or to refrain from doing some specific thing. An offer is the manifestation of willingness to enter into a bargain, so made as to justify another person in understanding that his assent to that bargain is invited and will conclude it. An acceptance is an offeree’s expression of assent or agreement to the terms of an offer. An acceptance must be unconditional, unequivocal, and properly communicated.
Analysis: In this case, the plaintiff-appellants failed to accept the defendant’s counteroffer. In which time there was a second purchaser, Plaintiff-appellee, who submitted an offer to the defendant that was accepted. The plaintiff-appellee also gave earnest