Nat'l Co. v. Navarro - 149 So. 2d 648 (La. Ct. App. 1963)

Rule:

The general rule relating to offer and acceptance is stated in La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1800, which reads: the contract, consisting of a proposition and the consent to it, the agreement is incomplete until the acceptance of the person to whom it is proposed. If he, who proposes, should before that consent is given, change his intention on the subject, the concurrence of the two wills is wanting, and there is no contract.

Facts:

The homeowners signed a document and gave a deposit for aluminum siding. The homeowners testified that the company's salesmen assured them that the document was not binding and could be cancelled. The salesmen denied giving this assurance and the document provided that it was binding subject to rejection by a company executive. The next day, the homeowners cancelled the siding, but the salesman advised them that the siding could not be cancelled. The homeowners refused delivery of materials and the next day, received a letter from the company stating that the offer had been accepted. The company instituted the present suit, endeavoring to recover the sum of $ 1,061.40, representing liquidated damages and expenses incurred by the company as a result of the homeowners’ alleged breach of contract. The trial court held that the homeowners revoked their offer before the company accepted it and awarded the homeowners their deposit. The company argued that pursuant to La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1809, the offer was irrevocable because it had to arrange financing for the work.

Issue:

Was the offer irrevocable, thereby entitling the homeowners to recover their deposit? 

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the order of the trial court, which denied the company's demand for liquidated damages for the homeowners' alleged breach of contract, and awarded the homeowners their deposit. The court held that the homeowners did not intend to make their offer irrevocable and under La. Civ. Code Ann. art. 1800, they were entitled to withdraw the offer before it was accepted. The homeowners were entitled to their deposit even though the company did not file an answer to their reconventional demand.