Connection lost
Server error
La Salle National Bank v. Vega Case Brief
Audio Insights: Learn Cases on The Go
Transform downtime into productive study time with our premium audio insights. Perfect for commutes, workouts, or visual breaks from reading.
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A real estate document explicitly required a trustee’s signature to become a binding contract. Because the trustee never signed, the court held that the seller’s offer was never accepted and thus no contract was ever formed.
Legal Significance: This case establishes that when an agreement specifies a particular act (e.g., a signature) is required for it to be “in full force,” that act is the exclusive mode of acceptance. Without it, no contract is formed.
La Salle National Bank v. Vega Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff, La Salle National Bank as trustee, sought specific performance of an alleged real estate sales contract with Mel Vega. The document, drafted by the plaintiff’s counsel, was signed by the plaintiff’s purchasing agent and by Vega. A rider to the document contained a crucial provision: “Upon execution of this contract by the Seller, this contract shall be presented to the trust for full execution. Upon the trust’s execution, this contract will then be in full force…” Plaintiff attached a copy of the document to its verified complaint, which was not signed by the trustee, and alleged it was a “true and correct copy” of the contract. There was no evidence that the trustee had ever executed the document. A third-party intervenor, who had a separate contract for the same property, moved for summary judgment, arguing that no contract existed between the plaintiff and Vega because the trustee had never signed the document. The trial court granted summary judgment, finding no contract was formed.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did a legally enforceable contract form when a real estate document, which explicitly stated it would be in ‘full force’ only upon the trustee’s signature, was never executed by the trustee?
No, a contract was not formed. The court affirmed summary judgment, holding Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat null
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Did a legally enforceable contract form when a real estate document, which explicitly stated it would be in ‘full force’ only upon the trustee’s signature, was never executed by the trustee?
Conclusion
This case provides a clear illustration that parties can, through explicit language, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim a
Legal Rule
An offeror has complete control over an offer and may govern the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. D
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis focused on the fundamental principles of offer and acceptance. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit,
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- No contract was formed because the offer was never accepted in