Business Law

Dear Mr. Mayor:

I have done some background research pertaining to issues of legal contracts and your idea to use EBay as a promotional tactic to attract tourism. We must be careful and aware that we do not go into a legal dispute of a contract and have someone actually think he/she can actually purchase Bigtown. The four elements that constitute a contract are the following:

* Agreement." To have an enforceable contract, there must be an agreement between the parties. This requires an offer by the offeror and an acceptance of the offer by the offeree" (R.Cheesman, 2006).

* Consideration. "The promise must be supported by a bargained-for consideration that is legally sufficient. Gift promises and morale obligations are not considered supported by valid consideration" (R.Cheesman, 2006).

* Contractual capacity. "The parties to a contract must have contractual capacity" (R.Cheesman, 2006)

* Lawful object. "The object of the contract must be lawful. Contracts to accomplish illegal objects or contracts that are against public policy are void" (R.Cheesman, 2006).

We have also researched the objective theory of contracts and found that the intent to enter into an express or implied-in-fact contract is judged by the reasonable person standard (R.Cheesman, 2006). By us placing the town for auction on EBay we are accepting intent to sell Bigtowns. With such a large community visiting EBay we are falling into a contract issue with the person who decides to place a monetary bid for the town. Even though we are trying to bring tourism we are creating legal issues, EBay is a recognized website for buy/sell trade and people who visit this website are interested in buying and selling.

Mr. Mayor there was a similar situation with John D.R. Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc where the PepsiCo used a Harrier-Jet in their commercial. PepsiCo advertised you could win the jet plane by drinking Pepsi and participating in the "Pepsistuff" where you would acquire Pepsi points to buy items in the "Pepsi Stuff catalog". The plaintiff understood PepsiCo was selling a jet plane and through some simple math calculations understood he could win the jet plane by simple buying (15) Pepsi points and a check for $700,008.50 which he produced and submitted to PepsiCo (John D.R. Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc, 1999).

The United States District Court, Southern District of New York court grants defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court also states that PepsiCo was only joking when it implied in its ad that it was giving away a 23 million fighter jet away (John D.R. Leonard v. PepsiCo, Inc, 1999). The court held that there was not a valid agreement because according to the judgment "The