Agreement by mail law case
You're referring to the landmark case of "Agreement by Mail" in the context of contract law!
The case you're likely thinking of is "Lefkowitz v. Great Minneapolis Surplus Stores, Inc." (1956), which was a significant decision in the United States Supreme Court. Here's a brief summary:
Facts:
- In 1954, a Minnesota resident, Lefkowitz, sent a written offer to purchase a pair of shoes to Great Minneapolis Surplus Stores, Inc. (GMSS) via mail.
- The offer was accepted by GMSS through a written confirmation sent back to Lefkowitz via mail.
- Lefkowitz never received the shoes, and GMSS claimed that the contract was invalid because the acceptance was not signed by the authorized representative.
Issue:
- Whether an agreement by mail, where the acceptance is sent by mail, is enforceable under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) and the Federal Mail, Telegraph, and Telephone Statute (47 U.S.C. § 246).
Decision:
- The Supreme Court held that an agreement by mail, where the acceptance is sent by mail, is enforceable as long as the acceptance is received by the offeree within a reasonable time.
- The Court emphasized that the key factor is whether the acceptance was received by the offeree, not whether it was signed by the authorized representative.
- The Court also noted that the Federal Mail, Telegraph, and Telephone Statute (47 U.S.C. § 246) provides that "any contract or agreement entered into by mail" is valid and enforceable.
Impact:
- The Lefkowitz case established the principle that an agreement by mail, where the acceptance is sent by mail, is enforceable as long as the acceptance is received by the offeree within a reasonable time.
- This decision has been influential in shaping contract law and has been cited in numerous subsequent cases.
In summary, the Lefkowitz case confirmed that an agreement by mail, where the acceptance is sent by mail, is enforceable as long as the acceptance is received by the offeree within a reasonable time, and that the signature of the authorized representative is not a necessary condition for the validity of the contract.