On August 1, 2021, Bill decided to buy a home in the City of La Verne, California. He downloaded the Zillow app to his phone and began scrolling through the homes listed for sale in the City of La Verne. Zillow is a real estate app that lists all houses currently for sale throughout the state of California; the application provides the sellers name, house address, pictures, total square footage, price, and other information that may be relevant to the sale and purchase of any given home. After viewing several homes on the Zillow App, he saw a home on 7th street he was interested in purchasing. The house was being offered for sale at a price of $750,000. He immediately emailed the seller through the Zillow app stating he would like to purchase the home for the price listed. The seller (on that same day) responded via email stating that the house was no longer available for sale; however, the seller had another home on 5th Street that was very similar in size, lay-out and price. On August 2, Bill emailed Seller and demanded that he be sold the 7th Street House because Bill had emailed his acceptance to Seller to the email address provided by Seller on the Zillow App and that he accepted all the terms of Seller’s offer as articulated on the Zillow App. Did Bill and Seller form a valid contract? IRAC your rationale in the comments!

Brown entered into a contract to purchase a condominium from Smith for $150,000 and paid Smith $15,000 as a down payment. The contract expressly provided that if Brown breached the contract, Smith would retain the $15,000 down payment as payment for the damages occasioned by Brown’s breach. Before the closing date, Brown decided not to purchase the condominium and instead purchased a different condominium. Smith refused to return the down payment. In an action by Brown to recover the down payment, which of the following are true? A. Brown will not be entitled to restitution of the down payment because a breaching party cannot maintain an action for restitution B. Brown will not be entitled to restitution of the down payment because Brown willfully breached the contract. C. Brown will not be entitled to restitution of the down payment since the express terms of the contract stipulated that Smith would retain the $15,000 down payment as liquidated damages occasioned by Brown’s breach D. Brown will be entitled to restitution of the down payment because down payment forfeiture clauses are per se illegal penalty clauses.