Connection lost
Server error
Mattei v. Hopper Case Brief
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 contract conditioned on the buyer obtaining “satisfactory” leases was held enforceable. The court found the buyer’s promise was not illusory because it was constrained by an implied duty of good faith.
Legal Significance: Establishes that a contractual promise conditioned on the promisor’s subjective satisfaction is not illusory, as the promisor’s discretion is limited by an implied duty of good faith, which constitutes valid consideration.
Mattei v. Hopper 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 Mattei, a real estate developer, entered into a written agreement to purchase defendant Hopper’s land for a planned shopping center. The agreement, a deposit receipt, required a $1,000 deposit and gave Mattei 120 days to consummate the purchase. A key provision stated the agreement was “Subject to Coldwell Banker & Co. obtaining leases satisfactory to the purchaser.” This clause was included to allow Mattei to secure tenants for the proposed shopping center before being fully committed to the purchase. Mattei paid the deposit and began securing leases. Before the 120-day period expired, Hopper’s attorney notified Mattei that Hopper was repudiating the agreement. Subsequently, Mattei informed Hopper that satisfactory leases had been obtained and he was ready to pay the balance of the purchase price. Hopper refused to tender the deed, and Mattei sued for breach of contract. The trial court found the agreement illusory and lacking mutuality of obligation.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Is a contractual promise rendered illusory and unenforceable for lack of consideration when performance is conditioned on the promisor’s subjective satisfaction with a matter involving personal judgment?
No, the promise is not illusory. The court held that a contract 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 repre
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
Is a contractual promise rendered illusory and unenforceable for lack of consideration when performance is conditioned on the promisor’s subjective satisfaction with a matter involving personal judgment?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the principle that subjective satisfaction clauses are enforceable, establishing Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veni
Legal Rule
A promise conditional upon the promisor's satisfaction is not illusory if 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. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occae
Legal Analysis
The court's analysis centered on whether the "satisfaction clause" rendered Mattei's promise 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 do
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A contract clause conditioning performance on a party’s satisfaction is not