From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lamb v. Morderosian

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 2, 1978
584 P.2d 796 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)

Opinion

No. 38-069, CA 10540

Argued July 19, 1978.

Affirmed October 2, 1978.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Washington County, Donald Ashmanskas, Judge.

Gerald R. Pullen, Portland, argued the cause and filed the brief for appellants.

Ralph Bolliger, Beaverton, argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief was Bolliger, Hampton Tarlow, Beaverton.

Before Johnson, Presiding Judge, and Gillette and Roberts, Judges.


PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.


1, 2. Defendants appeal from a summary judgment directing specific performance of an earnest money agreement for sale of a residence. There is no dispute as to any material facts. We decide this case on two elementary principles of law: 1) where an offeree mails to his agent both an acceptance and a counteroffer and the agent submits only the acceptance to the offeror, the offeree is bound by his agent's actions; and 2) the acceptance was not valid until the agent communicated it to the offeror — Restatement of Contracts § 64, Illustration 2 (1932).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Lamb v. Morderosian

Oregon Court of Appeals
Oct 2, 1978
584 P.2d 796 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)
Case details for

Lamb v. Morderosian

Case Details

Full title:LAMB et ux, Respondents, v. MORDEROSIAN et ux, Appellants

Court:Oregon Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 2, 1978

Citations

584 P.2d 796 (Or. Ct. App. 1978)
584 P.2d 796

Citing Cases

Reich v. Dunlay

176 Or. App. at 451 (citing C.R. Shaw Wholesale Co. v. Hackbarth, 102 Or. 80, 92, 198 P. 908 (1921)).…