Connection lost
Server error
SOUTHWORTH v. OLIVER 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 rancher sent a letter with detailed sale terms to a neighbor after prior discussions. The court held the letter was a binding offer, not a mere price quote, because surrounding circumstances would lead a reasonable person to believe an offer was intended.
Legal Significance: This case exemplifies the objective theory of contract formation, showing how a price quotation, when combined with prior negotiations and specific terms, can constitute a legally binding offer, even if sent to multiple parties.
SOUTHWORTH v. OLIVER 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
Defendants, the Olivers, decided to sell a portion of their ranch. Defendant Joseph Oliver approached plaintiff Southworth, an adjacent landowner, who expressed strong interest in purchasing the property. Oliver informed Southworth that he would determine the property’s value and send him the information. Subsequently, the Olivers mailed a letter to Southworth and three other neighbors. The letter stated they were providing “information” and listed 2,933 acres of land for sale at a price of $324,419. It specified detailed terms, including a 29% down payment with the balance payable over five years at 8% interest, and proposed a sale date. Upon receipt, Southworth immediately sent a letter back stating, “I accept your offer.” The Olivers then attempted to revoke, claiming their letter was not an offer. Southworth sued for specific performance.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did the defendants’ letter, which detailed the price and terms for the sale of their ranch and was sent to the plaintiff following prior discussions, constitute a legally binding offer that could be accepted to form a contract?
Yes. The court affirmed the decree of specific performance, holding that 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
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 the defendants’ letter, which detailed the price and terms for the sale of their ranch and was sent to the plaintiff following prior discussions, constitute a legally binding offer that could be accepted to form a contract?
Conclusion
This case serves as a key illustration of how courts analyze 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 volu
Legal Rule
Whether a communication constitutes an offer is determined by the objective theory 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. Lo
Legal Analysis
The court applied the objective test for offer formation, finding the defendants' 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
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Under the objective theory of contracts, a communication is an offer