Barchus v. Johnson - 151 La. 985, 92 So. 566 (1922)

Rule:

An option to buy or not to buy immovable property must be evidenced by a written instrument, that the acceptance of the offer made in such instrument must equally be evidenced by writing, and that it must be tendered to the proposer before the time limited in the option has expired.

Facts:

The buyer accepted the option to purchase certain lands by telephone within the option time limit but sent a written acceptance of the option eight days after the expiration of the time within which the seller had agreed to become bound by such acceptance. The buyer sued the seller for specific performance. The district court held in favor of the seller. The buyer appealed.

Issue:

Could the buyer sue the seller for specific performance when the written acceptance of the option was tendered to the seller after the expiration of the time within which the seller had agreed to become bound by such acceptance?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court denied relief, holding that eight days after the time limit had expired was too late to accept. The acceptance by telephone was by parol, and, if the seller had attempted to enforce the contract on an acceptance by parol, the buyer would promptly and properly have objected to parol testimony to prove a binding promise on his part to purchase immovable property. Under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 2275, all contracts relative to the transfer of immovable property had to be in writing. Therefore, an option to buy or not to buy immovable property had to be evidenced by a written instrument. The acceptance of the offer made in such instrument had to equally be evidenced by writing, and it had to be tendered to the seller before the time limited in the option had expired.