Benner imports Inc, an automobile dealership, placed an advertisemet in the chicago sun times to sell a station wagon. The advertisement displayed a price that was $700 lower than the dealership had indicated in the advertising copy sent to the newspaper. A customer wanted to buy the car at the advertised price. The company refused to sell. The customer argued that the advertisement was and offer that he accepted, creating a binding contract.

1. Do you agree with the customer or the auto dealership. Why?
2. Explain the legal principles that apply to this case and it's likely outcome.
3. What implications could this case have on you personally or on others today?
I've been trying to figure this out for months and I'm completely lost. Thank you for your help.

http://www.google.com/search?q=false+advertising+laws&oq=false+advertising&aqs=chrome.2.69i57j0l5.11794j0j7&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=119&ie=UTF-8

Read, read, read ... and focus on the laws in your state regarding false advertising.

How are laws enacted in the United States and what can the Supreme Court do about these laws

1. In order to determine who is in the right, we need to examine the legal principles related to contract formation and advertisement offers. Generally, advertisements are considered invitations to make an offer and not offers themselves. The customer's argument hinges on whether the advertisement was an offer or just an invitation to make an offer.

Generally, an offer must contain all essential terms of the agreement, such as price, quantity, and a clear intention to be bound. In this case, the dealership evidently made a mistake in the advertised price, as it was $700 lower than intended. Therefore, it is unlikely that the advertisement itself constituted a binding offer. Therefore, if the advertisement was only an invitation to make an offer, the dealership would not be legally obligated to sell the car at the advertised price.

2. The legal principle that applies here is the concept of offer and acceptance. An offer is a clear expression of willingness to enter into a contract on specific terms, while acceptance is the unequivocal and unqualified expression of agreement to the terms of the offer.

In this case, the advertisement displayed a price lower than intended by the dealership, which suggests a mistake. Mistakes in advertisements are usually not considered binding offers. Instead, they are seen as invitations to negotiate or make an offer. Since the customer accepted the offer mentioned in the advertisement, it could potentially be seen as acceptance. However, the dealership can argue that there was no valid offer, as the mistake in the advertisement prevents its formation.

The likely outcome would depend on the specific laws and precedents of the jurisdiction in question. Courts generally consider the intent of the parties, the reasonableness of the mistake, and any relevant consumer protection laws. If the court determines that the advertisement was indeed just an invitation to make an offer, the customer would not have a strong case for a legally binding contract.

3. The implications of this case could have an impact on consumers and businesses alike. It emphasizes the importance of accuracy in advertising and the need for businesses to be cautious in their promotions. For consumers, it serves as a reminder to approach advertised prices skeptically and be aware that they may not always be legally binding.

Additionally, this case highlights the significance of understanding contract formation principles. It demonstrates that not all advertisements constitute offers, and customers need to understand the legal framework behind contracts to protect their rights and make informed decisions.

It is important to note that laws can vary depending on the jurisdiction, and consulting with a legal professional would be beneficial to fully comprehend the specific circumstances of the case.