1. Read the attached case about a Pennsylvania golfer who saw a sign at a course advertising a prize of a new car if a golfer scored a hole in one on that hole. As it turned out, the offer was for a tournament that had already ended but the signs had not yet been removed. Since the golfer was unaware of that fact, saw the offer, and he subsequently made a hole in one, the court awarded him the car, reasoning the circumstances satisfied all the requirements for a valid offer and acceptance.
2.Read the short dissenting opinion, which argues that making a hole in one is a fortuitous matter of luck and not golf skill and that the “offer” and “performance” by the golfer in making the shot was simply a matter of chance, calculated to be 1 in 20,000 and was therefore against Pennsylvania law prohibiting gambling and a (then) illegal act.
3. Who do you think was correct? Was it the majority or the dissent? Why?
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|